Political Humor

1912 readers

421 users here now

Welcome to Political Humor!

Rules:

Be excellent to each other.
No harassment.
No sexism, racism or bigotry.
All arguments should be made in good faith.
No misinformation. Be prepared to back up your factual claims with evidence.
All posts should relate to politics and be of a humorous nature.
No bots, spam or self-promotion.
If you want to run a bot, ask first.
Site wide rules apply.
Have fun.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

BuckRowdy@lemmy.world

Diplomjodler3@lemmy.world

426

Crazy loops (feddit.org)

submitted 1 week ago by NichEherVielleicht@feddit.org to c/politicalhumor@lemmy.world

47 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] trollercoaster@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Isn't it quite obvious? Having a government that's not as utterly abhorrent and disagreeable as that of Josef Stalin is quite possible, even if you are a one party dictatorship. Likewise not having imperialist ambitions is utterly possible.

On top of that, especially since the Soviet Union anticipated that Nazi Germany would turn on them at some point, reacting to that becoming a fact more quickly and decisively could have helped. Stalin was so hell bent and stubborn about not provoking Hitler at any cost, that defensive action was practically forbidden even until for quite some time after the invasion had started. His purges of the military (partially instigated by Nazi German military intelligence to weaken the Soviet Union) didn't help with defence either. But I guess that's all symptoms of Stalinism. If you have a megalomaniac paranoid autocrat who has practically anyone who disagrees with him shot, you get that kind of a dysfunctional shitshow as a state.

[–] plyth@feddit.org 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Likewise not having imperialist ambitions is utterly possible.

USSR was about global socialism. How could they be non imperialistic? But then, is it imperialism to spread socialism?

Stalin was so hell bent and stubborn about not provoking Hitler

There were three spheres of power, two of which hoping the other two would fight each other. As Tolc mentioned, the USSR tried to create an alliance. After that failed which other options were left?

[–] trollercoaster@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

socialism

Under Stalin, yes, of course. That's almost as unhinged as people claiming Hitler was socialist because he had "socialist" in his party's name.

which other options were left?

Preparing to defend against Nazi Germany without the land grabs in Eastern Europe?

[–] plyth@feddit.org 0 points 1 week ago

socialism

They didn't amass riches for an elite and didn't build their country on racial superiority. That's closer than most to socialism.

without the land grabs in Eastern Europe?

The Curzon Line was a proposed demarcation line between the Second Polish Republic and the Soviet Union, two new states emerging after World War I.

The line became a major geopolitical factor during World War II, when the USSR invaded eastern Poland, resulting in the split of Poland's territory between the USSR and Nazi Germany roughly along the Curzon Line in accordance with final rounds of secret negotiations surrounding the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curzon_Line

Why is it a land grab if that was the start?

Preparing to defend against Nazi Germany without the land grabs

The "land grabs" happened after Germany started conquering. The preparations had to be made before.

I am no expert at all so please correct me if I am wrong but I think that only the SU made suggestions for, as Tolc mentions, "collective security". What else should they have done?