Thread 17974035

Historically speaking, is this a trvke?

>>17974035 (OP)
No its not true at all liberals literally went to war and destroyed facism.

>>17974037
I think it refers to the rise of fascism, not the war itself

>>17974041
That doesnt make any sense.

>>17974035 (OP)
Not really

>>17974035 (OP)
Was the Soviet Union liberal when it signed the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact?

>>17974045
T-that doesnt count s-shut up chud

>>17974041
The liberals were the only people who voted against the enabling act while communists abstained.

>>17974043
Historical examples of liberals allying with fascism against communism include:
>In post-World War I Germany, the Social Democratic Party (SPD), which was liberal at the time, allied with the Freikorps, a proto-fascist paramilitary group, to violently crush the German socialist revolution and eliminate communist leaders like Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht. This alliance helped suppress communism and paved the way for the eventual rise of Nazism.
>In Italy, Mussolini's fascists initially gained power with backing from liberal industrial capitalists and bankers. The Italian liberals supported fascists' electoral laws and ran joint candidate slates to suppress socialism and communism during a period of major economic and political crisis after World War I. This collaboration was crucial in establishing fascist rule.
>In Germany, large industrialists and bankers supported the Nazi party financially to fight communism through parliamentary means. The Nazis rose to power with liberal acquiescence, with the Social Democrats refusing a last-minute electoral coalition with communists against fascism in 1932, choosing to side with reactionaries instead of the communist left.
>Western liberal democracies, including the United Kingdom, France, and Italy, preferred appeasement and non-intervention against Nazi Germany partly to prevent stronger alliances with the Soviet Union, reflecting a tacit preference for fascism or liberal capitalism over communism before World War II.
>The choice of liberals to collaborate with or tolerate fascist regimes was driven by a shared determination to prevent the spread of socialism or communism, which fascists violently opposed alongside liberals. This antagonism to Marxist socialism aligned liberal and fascist interests against the communist left.

>>17974035 (OP)
Fascists are socialists

>>17974056
@grok is this true?

>>17974035 (OP)
No it's just a socialist persecution complex, "liberals" have sided with different factions depending on the circumstances. As anon >>17974045 pointed out, even the Soviet Union temporarily sided with fascists when it suited them, in fact Stalin had a naive belief that they could keep Hitler happy and he wouldn't invade.

>>17974035 (OP)
No, its the opposite, Liberals and Conservatives both side with the radical far left over Fascists.
Fascists in Italy, Germany, Peru, Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Greece, Britain, Spain excepted, ALL had to fight a coalition of Liberals, Conservatives, and Communists.
capital isnt the underpinning of a nation-state, it is stability and Fascists are true revolutionaries because they can mobilize the military.
Commie revolts are little more than peasant uprisings.
For example in the USSR it wasnt hordes of workers rising up, it was soldiers it was former veterans making the spearhead attacks with workers being abysmal at fighting the state.

The only threat to a state is an organized core of armed men.
Workers arent able to put this together.
Soldiers are.
Fascists who mobilize veterans are a threat to national stability in a way other revolutionary movements are not.

>>17974337
>Stalin had a naive belief that they could keep Hitler happy and he wouldn't invade.
>Stalin was afraid of Hitler
was he?

>>17974035 (OP)
cripes what a load of shit

>>17974448
>Spain excepted
How is Spain an exception. Liberals fought with communists against the fascists in their civil war

>>17974035 (OP)
>>17974045
“If we see that Germany is winning we should supply Russia and if we see that Russia is winning we should supply Germany and that way we let them kill as many as possible.”- Harry Truman as governor of New York in 1940

>>17974045
comrade they only signed that because the liberal bourgeois westoids abandoned them coooommmmmmraaaaaadddde

>>17975021
Harry Truman was a haberdasher from Missouri, he was never governor of New York

>>17974035 (OP)
Everybody will side with whoever they can against socialism because they need food to stay alive and socialism prevent the production of everything, including food.

>>17974037
the liberals happily scooped up the fascists after the war and rehabilitated them though. the soviets executed or imprisoned their nazis

>>17975064
Senator of Mi. Huh, I don’t know where I got New York from

>>17974035 (OP)
ah yes, the classic commie lie that fascism is capitalism in decay.

>>17975104
>the soviets executed or imprisoned their nazis
Not only did they not to that, they even gave them their own little larp party in east Germany.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Democratic_Party_of_Germany_(East_Germany)

Even an event they obsess over as much as WWII can be forgotten in the minds of leftists when it becomes inconvenient for them. This is like when you get some idiots claiming the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact proves "horseshoe theory," totally ignoring the fact that they launched a war to save communism.

>>17974035 (OP)
Are you forgetting about WWII?

>>17974035 (OP)
The liberals sided with the socialists in the Spanish Civil War and got fucked over for it.

>>17976202
The allies are the new fascists because anything that isn't communism get called fascism at one point or another.
Having that in mind, look at the question OP posted again.

>>17976207
So OP is a delusional tankie?

>>17975104
Nope
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Osoaviakhim

>>17975104
Operation Osoaviakhim though.

>>17976202
See >>17974059

>>17974035 (OP)
What does liberal mean?
Genuine question.
Fascists told me communism is a result of liberalism.

>>17976222
Well, if you tolerate people who just want to take your things, you obtain people who just want to take your things.

There really isn't more to the story of the modern left.

>>17974035 (OP)
Communism is fascism you stupid nigger cattle

>>17974043
Italian liberals ran on a joint list with fascists, Japanese liberals just threw up their hands and gave up on trying to control the military, and German liberals (after wrecking the Weimar Coalition because it wouldn't screw over workers enough during the Great Depression) voted for the enabling act

>>17975104
>JUST KILL'EM YEAH
ever heard of rehabilitative justice leftard?

>>17974035 (OP)
Fascism threatens Capitalism is the same way that Marxist Social Democracy does. Any radical element of it is strips away in favour an alliance with the Bourgeoise class, just compare D'Annunzio's Fiume to Mussolini's Italy.
Liberal, like every other group of people (although i don't believe they should be referred to as such) will work with whoever benefits them in the moment, regardless of political ideology.

>>17974455
Who said he was afraid of Hitler?
Stalin thought he was going to get killed or imprisoned when Nazis invaded l, sat around stunned for a few days, and the war in the east was much closer than i thought previously.
Maybe he was.

>>17976222
It's a wide field. It has stuff like human rights, workers rights, seperation of church and state.
You can see why communism would have some overlap.
Russia actually tried going liberal before Communism. But anti monarchists(liberals) or something ruined it.
Some people saw communism as the end state of liberalism. Some saw it as oppressive totalarianism worse than any monarchy.
And marx and communists definitely drew some inspiration from western liberalism.

>>17975000
Conservatives

>>17974059
>no replies to AI trvthnvke

Both liberals and conservatives are in favor of fascism. It's the greedy elite who want "democracy."

>>17974035 (OP)
yes. that's what wignat trannies never understand

>>17976460
>just compare D'Annunzio's Fiume to Mussolini's Italy.
What about it?

>>17977480
but fascism is just those same elites getting to throw you in jail for dissent (i.e. organizing unions or trying to stop them from starting wars)

>>17978322
>throw you in jail for dissent (i.e. organizing unions or trying to stop them from starting wars)
This in 2025 only happens in Russia and China. Meanwhile Yookay jails you for wrongthink memes

>>17978205
D'Annunzio's Fiume was the truest and realist expression of Fascism whilst Mussolini's Italy never reached the same heights, Carnaro was also destroyed by the bourgeoise Italian state while the Italian bourgeoise were mildly supportive of Mussolini. the real expression of Fascism as a revolutionary outlook was destroyed, the non-revolutionary expression, was then paraded around by the same groups which destroyed the revolutionary expression.
Similar things happened to Social democratic parties, of which Fascism is the perfect form

>>17978322
Something tells me you live in a third world autocratic country.

>>17974035 (OP)
I seem to remember something about a huge kerfuffle where the 'capitalist' countries and the 'communist' big dog teamed up to destroy the 'fascist' states. Am I alone in this?

>>17976666
No, no, you have to incorporate communist newspeak where any one who isn't liberal or communist is fascist.

>>17978727
I meant that while the liberals allied with the communists, the conservatives allied with the fascists, which is what that guy meant by saying Spain was an exception

>>17974035 (OP)
Commies say this to villify liberals, but really they're right to side with fascism over them.
Both options suck ass, but fascists will atleast not crash the entire economy and murder anyone who isn't poor.

>>17974035 (OP)
If that were true wouldn't Britain, France, and America have happily thrown in with the 3rd Reich and Japan to kick the shit out of the Soviets? Rather than allying with the Soviets to kick the shit out of the 3rd Reich and Japan?
>Da Joooos
Far more heavily represented in Soviet than Democratic politics at the time, even in America.

>>17974035 (OP)
Shitlibs ban fascism whilst not only allowing but also funding communists

>>17975086
cute snake drawings, but this text is ridiculous circular logic. It says communists have historically been violent showing they are amoral, therefore they are not human so we must be violent and amoral to them to prevent violence and amorality in our society.

I believe in human rights and due process, not dehumanization and guilt by association.

>>17974448
>Italy
Prime Minister Giovanni Giolitti (a liberal) included Mussolini’s Fascists in his electoral coalition in 1921. The church & the monarchy both tacitly preferred mussolini to the alternatives.

>Germany
Papen, Hugenburg both allied with the nazis despite being liberal/conservatives. The president Hinderburg then named Hitler chancelor & the NSDAP allied with long-standing industrials.

>Spain
Not true. The only liberals who helped the republicans did it in ideals for democracy and saw it as a fight against dictatorships, not communism.

>Brittain
Again, the liberals only fought Mosley because the alternative was sufficient and didn't advocate for communism.

>Peru & other third world
These were literally anti-communist conservative movements

I don't understand why you want to deny it. Historically speaking, conservatives and liberals hated communists because they threatened their dearest things; capital & tradition. On the other hand, fascists were this blend of conservatives with social elements and they seemed appealing to many voters.

>>17976222
That men are created equal and have a right to happiness and freedom of life.
This entails that work on god-given land can mean ownership, that people should live like they want to even if they're wrong, and that the state should only be used for collective responsibilities.

>Fascists told me communism is a result of liberalism.
Ideologically, given that the economy implies shared-consequences, it can be argued that the state should plan the economy to fulfill the liberal dream.
Historically, it's the opposite. Liberals don't want to give up their property and side with whoever protects that property the best (often fascists).

>>17978788
Anon the soviets literally attacked them...

>>17974045
Kinda. Stalin preferred sacrificing the popular masses in germany/europe to have socialism in one country than fighting for his ideals. It was the same logic, sacrificing others to preserve what you have

>>17974035 (OP)
why do lefties use this as a dunk?
first of all, both fascists and commies are authoritarian at the end of the day, just with different priorities when it comes to economic policy or focus on racial purity
Communists are not the allies of liberals, communists will eventually work towards banning most of what is guaranteed under a liberal system
there is no win win between or or another
also, do people ignore that Stalin and Hitler allied? they literally joined forces to divide Poland, but I guess when a left wing authoritarian regime does is its not imperialism, imperialism is only when the right wing authoritarian regime does it or something

>>17979575
>von Papen, Hugenburg, von Hindenburg
>liberals
They weren't even democrats. No idea what that Anon is saying about conservatives allying with the far left, but the argument of the OP is obviously silly given the most important time this came up liberals did in fact side with socialism over fascism.

It's exactly the other way around, liberals allied with communism to destroy fascism, and most real communist intellectuals are not anti-capitalist, they call themselves "post-capitalists", and both socialism/communism and liberalism are international movements, both are globalist in their own way, only fascism is pro nationalism/traditionalism and anti-globalism
Even communist and progressive intellectuals (I was a hardcore lefty during my college years) admit this, so OP's pic is not only extremely retarded, it's a very pathetic and disgusting way to twist the narrative just to cope

>>17974035 (OP)
>Historically speaking, is this a trvke?
Considering that real socialism/communism has never been tried, necessarily yes.
Like the allies supported Stalin over Hitler, but "not real communism", you know.
And today the elites chose to mindrape leftists rather than right wingers, but you already know what they're gonna say.

>>17979738
>Considering that real socialism/communism has never been tried, necessarily yes.
lol

>>17974037
You're a retard.

>>17979738
>Marxism Leninism have never been tried, Lenin was never in charge of anything, everybody lie, history is fake.
You can taste their desperation.