Wasn't he so bad that the people were so hungry that they rose up and killed him? Weird choice.
this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2024
0 points (NaN% liked)
the_dunk_tank
15926 readers
2 users here now
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
Yeah but he was killed by communists therefor he needs a hagiography.
Revolutions do not occur in countries being managed well.
I can understand the lib mindframe that criticizes communism. What I can't understand is defending the people who were so bad, that the workers had to kill them and change governments. That's kind of a red flag outside of CIA coups.
Libs love their Great Man Theory and believe that everything was fine in Russia until the evil wizard Lenin hypnotized the hapless masses into overthrowing their rightful rulers.
It's like how they act as if the Holocaust sprang solely from the machinations of Hitler and wasn't the inevitable conclusion to terminal-stage capitalism architected by a capitalist ruling class seeking to preserve its own power and carried out with the aid of millions of willing collaborators.
until the evil wizard Lenin hypnotized the hapless masses
This is Rasputin erasure
Anastasia is only a slightly exaggerated version of how libs view the Russian Revolution and I wish I were kidding.
Don't know how true it is but I've read that even by the standards of brutal monarchies of his time, Nicholas II was the worst.
There's a reason there's a legitimate discussion over whether or not murdering his children was the right move.
Not generally a sign of a good leader that there's a pretty compelling argument for wiping out the entire bloodline.
Even if you're a monarchist dipshit he was a long fucking way from being the best Tsar lmao
I guess it makes sense since the fact that one dipshit is all it takes to lose it all is yet another mark against monarchy (ignoring all the mistakes of the past couple of tsars which led up to his reign).
[shakes fist] why is the emoji named lenin-palace... it's a painting of a ~~red army soldier~~ Bolshevik revolutionary, not Lenin @WhyEssEff@hexbear.net
His actions led to the end of the brutal Tsarist regime in Russia, so you have to give hm credit for that
Yeah. Like the credit we give the guy who killed Hitler.
But he also killed the guy who killed Hitler so it's a mixed bag.
The USSR spent all of WW2 fighting the guy who killed Hitler. Horseshoe theory proven