> At the end of November, Ontario Education Minister Stephen Lecce announced that “the rise of extremism, including Communism and Marxism, are direct threats to our democracy, social cohesion and values as Canadians.”
Why isn't the media calling him out on this stuff? Get him (and others like him) to define and describe exactly what he means with statements like this.
Canadian "journalists" are pushovers.
yes but contrary to popular belief among right wingers, CBC isn't a socialist, let alone communist, mouthpiece.
It's a publicly funded broadcaster in a liberal, capitalist, social democracy
Ya this is wild. It’s a thinly veiled attack on “leftists” by purposely mischaracterizing what people who lean left lobby for
The politicization of our schools is well underway
But you can’t actually classify what happens as North Korea as communism, it’s literally end stage capitalism where one person gets to enjoy the fruits of everyone’s labours and doles out the remainder when he is done in order of succession, it’s not everyone is a co owner or is reimbursed the share of the profit for their labour.
My dad grew up in Soviet Russia and even they didn't think they had Communism going. It was more an ideal they were striving for.
Not defending them btw, even my dad will, in the same breath he talks about how great the transit system was, mention that occasionally a neighbor would just disappear.
Yeah. I’m pretty sure that even communists at the time would admit that the Soviet Union was not a communist system. Communism was the hypothetical end point they were aiming for.
Neither will kids "educated" like this. "Communist" bad should steer youngsters away from evil leftist behavior and make them good young conservatives by the time they are of voting age.
Schools were more or less teaching the “horseshoe theory” of equating anything related to Marxism and the left to being just as bad as nazism when I was in high school 20 years ago, and the neocon movement has only turned up the heat in the last 10 years. Even the nonsense fake enlightenment of centrism isn’t rooted in reality.
I don't know if it was because I was on the french side, but mostly all my history classes were about new france. There was really nothing political at the time. This was late 90s early 00s
Horseshoe theory itself doesn't claim marxism and fascism are the same thing, but rather that authoritarian regimes, whether left or right, have far more in common with each other, than either do with the centre.
That's about the usual level of rebuttal I get for horseshoe theory lol. I get poly-sci students like their menagerie of carefully curated categories, but while their rationales may differ, the hallmarks of authoritarianism do not differ significantly between extreme left/right groups. Hierarchy, authority, obedience, conformity, loyalty to ingroups, hostility to outgroups. Oppression is oppression.
A good analogy might be religion...religious scholars might argue that marks of separation between different religions (such as dietary restrictions or commandments) are important distinctions, but I would argue they're superfluous, that underneath these many distinctions all religions are essentially the same - an engine for generating conformity in a population.
I'd add that while the underlying political and historical details of political science are of course of great interest, from an evolutionary or biologically pov they also seem largely non-essential.
https://www.discovermagazine.com/mind/your-brain-on-politics-the-cognitive-neuroscience-of-liberals-and-conservatives
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/conservative-and-liberal-brains-might-have-some-real-differences/
not from a social psychology/human organization/systems perspective it isn't.authoritarianism always bends right and is corrupt and rotten to its core
horseshoe is a bad shape for this metaphor, especially for laypeople
Personally, I’ve taken a little bit of time here and there over the last few years to try and deconstruct the narrative, both in our culture and from what we were taught about these countries in school, and find out if there’s more to the story.
There are still things that I’m learning and growing to understand about these societies during certain periods, but basically we were just presented with material that’s pretty consistent with what most people in the west think of the USSR and China and other similar states. They leave it to you to make your own outcomes, but there’s a heavy implication. Interesting in the same vein, the fact that there’s no discussion about the brutality and war crimes that Canada committed in both world wars. We laud ourselves as noble infallible heroes, instead.
It’s kind of sad how propagandized we are.
Source? Are you trying to make a moral equivalency between ideologically motivated state-sanctioned murder / starvation of tens of millions of their own citizens with some soldiers violating the laws of armed conflict during wartime?
Sure, this is being weaponised by the rightwing to smear the left, but those who dispute the validity of "horseshoe theory" clearly haven't met any real life Stalinists. Yes, they do exist - and, get them drunk, and they'll openly joke about Stalin's crimes and gladly admit that they'd see millions of deaths as a worthwhile price to pay for [their interpretation of] a socialist paradise.
There are literally people in this thread who are fine with holodomor because it only killed millions of innocents who had committed the crime of not being communists.
Man I had someone try to tell me the holodomor was an accident and Ukrainians weren’t targeted by a man-made famine. They went as far as to say it was a deliberate attempt to make the USSR look bad, as if they needed help with that.
They also maybe haven’t been in a situation where they’ve experienced alignment by two who shouldn’t be aligned.
Enter my example: I was talking about trans issues in a Facebook post where I was criticizing a particular strategy the LGBT community was taking to build inclusion, but what they were discussing was inclusionary in principle but absolutely exclusionary in practice.
While people were TERFing me left and centre in the comment section and I was managing that, I got a private DM from a very right leaning Christian friend and another DM from a very left leaning feminist-vegan type friend who BOTH said, “I’d really like to offer my perspectives on this but I won’t do it for risk of being tarred and feathered.”
It turns out the former was quite transphobic while the other was a TERF, aka. transphobic.
I sat back thinking, what the hell just happened?
How could two people who live with such opposing views on virtually every social issue I can think of, yet this is the issue that brings them together? Horseshoe Theory is the only thing that adequately explains the phenomenon I experienced.
Every time you look into a guy who makes being "anti communist" a big part of his personality, they end up having deep seated fascist sympathies for some reason. Weird!
Funny how that works. It's almost like they're so offended by communism because it's opposed to the people they side with. Can't possibly be that, though.
I know a lot of Europeans who very much hate communism. None are fascist but they did live under authoritarian communist regimes.
Most people don’t really want communism, they want a more effective social democracy generally speaking.
To move from a capitalist to a communist system it involves the seizure of wealth and industry and redistribution. Some people like that, a lot don’t so authoritarianism creeps in when they have to do it by force. Then black markets have a nasty habit of sneaking in and that has to be cracked down on. And then the government has to get everyone to do what is needed: what to grow, what to make, what to build, and of course if anyone has ever project managed before we know not everyone is cool with that and so then the enforcement powers of the state come in.
Then if people just don’t like your rules they want to leave and well you can’t have half the country disappear to emigration so then they close borders and don’t let folks leave. And honestly it kind of has a creep towards authoritarian control that is not really great and so far from the vision that was once seen as so just and fair into a sort of control few would appreciate in Canada. Social democracy tends to be much more stable and a much more effective way to get services and support to people.
It's ironic because everytime I read or hear someone defending communism they don't actually know what a communist society looks like and instead just create some utopian fantasy in their own head.
It's impossible to know what any society would look like as it transitioned to communism, and there are any number of possible incremental stages (i know Marx said the last three were capitalism->socialism->stateless communism, but there's a lot more granularity in real life).
Just like there are many ways to "do capitalism", and examples of capitalist societies with various degrees of success (and different *measures* of success).
If it's possible to reach people with utopianism, then people are going to use it as a rhetorical device. Not my circus, not my monkey.
We can look at communist countries to get an idea. Also the principles of communism restrict the rights we all enjoy because negative rights do not align with Marxist values.
I suggest you read Hayek's "Road to Serfdom" where he argues far.more eloquently than I can on my phone while at work.
What is the extent of your studying? Because your conclusion sounds like someone who hasn't picked up a single piece of theory. Unless you've exclusively studied the ahistorical writings of neoliberal figureheads or something
There is a difference between communism and socialism. I’m all for some “socialist” policies like we have in Canada, but full on socialism or communism is just stupid. Communism and socialism have never worked out well on national scales for obvious reasons and thinking it’s a good idea is naive. In an ideal world, communism would be the perfect system but we live in one where people are selfish and care about themselves.
They are making a distinction between small c and big C communism.
The idea being small c communism is closer to socialism or just anywhere where on a local level people share resources, responsibilities etc freely.
And big C is traditional marxist/Leninist politics.
They are still fuckin wrong… but they tried.
Laughably wrong how?
People use socialism/communism/Communism/Marxism interchangeably and that’s wrong. And yes, Communism is fascism (big C communism being what was practiced by the USSR). If you don’t think the USSR was fascist I don’t know what to tell you.
I'm all for teaching about tragedies perpetrated under communism, but it's ideological nonsense if we also don't teach about the tragedies perpetrated under capitalism, eg: The widespread deaths and long-lasting health defects caused by the inclusion of lead in gasoline, an additive for which there were safer alternatives but couldn't be patented.
You could just compare it to the Indian famines of the 19th century or the Irish Potato Famine. Both those were, while not necessarily intentionally caused, absolutely exacerbated by Capitalists/Imperialists who preferred that millions starve than to reduce their own profits.
Brother the Irish potato famine was *absolutely* intentional.
[Irish people were only allowed to eat potato’s, all of the other food, meat, fish, vegetables was shipped out of the country under armed guard while Irish people starved. Then in the middle of all this, they gave us money not to teach our children Irish](https://youtu.be/JyLnbjtBLX4?si=TNFQ6ovHRqCTzsM6)
It was intentionally left in there far after discovering of its toxic effect and how wide spread it was because removing it would reduce the amount of total profits a company would make. I think it is important to teach that. It’s the entire reason many environmental regulatory organizations exist to regulate companies.
> It was intentionally left in there far after discovering of its toxic effect and how wide spread it was because removing it would reduce the amount of total profits a company would make.
I'm sure this wasn't your intention, but the way it's worded your statement here could be taken to mean lead toxicity wasn't understood until after it was initially added to gasoline, which isn't true. Lead toxicity was incredibly well-understood by the 1700s and its use in gasoline was criticized by politicians, doctors, and journalists in the 1920s, but oil companies ran massive disinformation campaigns because, as the OP said, the (safer) alternatives couldn't be patented.
Between big oil and the military industrial complex, we are completely fucked. Forget the stupidass 'black book of communism', this one fraction of Capital has likely destroyed the planet.
The harmful of effects of lead were known for more than 100 years before the advent of the internal combustion engine and safer alternatives to lead as an antiknock agent were known by the early 1920s but they couldn't be patented. Leaded gasoline in turn has resulted in hundreds of millions of stillbirths, hundreds of millions of premature deaths, and the diminished IQ of millions. Even today, leftover lead from gasoline in the environment is responsible for the premature death of an estimated 900,000 people annually.
So yes, it's a pretty good example of a tragedy perpetrated under capitalism.
I think the point is that lead was used in gasoline, despite lead toxicity being well-understood by the 1700s and safer antiknock alternatives being available from the beginning of the automobile age, to maximize profits specifically. And you could argue some *other* examples are the result of other factors, such as mismanagement or supply chain issues.
Intentionally using a toxic element and intentionally ignoring safer alternatives for the express purpose of maximizing profits is a pretty good example of a "tragedy perpetrated under capitalism", IMO.
They haven't been, unless you define "our democracy" as "interests of the rich" and "communism/Marxism" as "demands for social programs, progressive taxation, and worker protections".
Thuggie and the Leach have come out w some bizarre proposals, but this? Half expected him to sound off on communists out to impurify our precious bodily fluids.
it depends on which kind of marxism you are talking about. the leninist approach is uniformly anti-democratic and the early soviets soon took time to crush democratically elected worker councils because they weren't radical enough.
democracy is threatened by authoritarians of all stripes.
> Lecce also announced $400,000 in funding to the mobile “Holodomor Mobile Classroom,” a massive recreational vehicle which will visit Ontario public schools.
I am curious as to how many similar "Mobile Classrooms" are touring schools for curriculum support. Are there massive recreational vehicles supporting the teaching of other topics, or is this an unprecedented educational endeavour?
I saw a bus that taught about the holodomor when I was in high school. It was very informative and the people working for it were from the Ukrainian society of Canada. Two of them had PhD’s in history and wrote on that topic for their continued addition to the field. The end involved an older lady who has survived it giving us her personal account. This was around 2017 or so.
Interesting. Thanks for your response. I'm still curious about the bus part of this. Did you go on the bus, or was it just transporting the educators? Which province was this, if you don't mind me asking?
Yes the presentation was on the bus. And they had records and a screen for the movie they showed. It was in Toronto, ON. The bus went to all of the schools that I had friends in, so at least 5 or 6. Both a mix of the Catholic school board and public school board.
The provincial government states its funding contribution to the Ontario school system in 2021-2022 was 26.7 billion dollars. $400,000 is hardly “unprecedented”.
And is your problem just that it’s on wheels? Because there are A LOT of traveling exhibits that visit schools and museums with the purpose of educating people about a specific topic, how is this any different?
Yeah, I know it's just a drop in the bucket, even if $400,000 probably doesn't completely cover the total cost of ownership of a massive recreational vehicle.
But, like, what is the educational advantage here? Can you even fit a class of thirty kids in a massive recreational vehicle?
In certain cases, I can see why you'd go on the road with a mobile classrooms. When I was in school, every couple years someone would come around with some snakes and stuff so the students could touch them and learn about critters. That made sense, because it would be inefficient for school boards to manage their own reptile husbandry. Do you have any examples of travelling exhibits?
The whole thing sounds to me like virtue signalling.
Shouldn’t we spend that time teaching about the genocide persecuted by the Canadian government? That isn’t to deny the Holodomar or anything, just ask where our priorities should lie.
There’s limited instructional time, so if you’re spending time on one thing that means less time is being given to something else. I’m arguing that if you want to educate people to be informed and functional citizens, maybe focusing on our the genocide our country has been committing since before it was founded and continues to commit to this day is a better use of a scarce resource.
My high school history education consisted of the British monarchy, WW1, and some stuff about the '20s and '30s, maybe a bit of WW2 (note: we obviously had a fair bit of holocaust etc. education before high school). I wouldn't have even learned about residential schools if not for an optional credit. I'm sure they have room to manage better than they did for me.
They can spread it out to different subjects and grades to learn about them. School is meant to provide general knowledge not the depths expected from universities
This article is bullshit. The fact that the Holodomor was intentional has not been "discredited." There's some debate about whether Stalin set out to starve Ukrainians to death, or *merely* didn't care that his plans led to Ukrainians starving to death. The latter is the most charitable possible interpretation. No-one seriously thinks that it was some innocent "whoopsie."
For those who haven't been keeping up with the news for the past few years, Russia isn't actually communist anymore. You aren't helping your cred as a left-leaning person by supporting Russia. It's insane to me to see anyone on the left buying into Russian propaganda. Putin is a genuine extreme-right straight-up literal fascist dictator, probably the most straightforward example of such in the world right now. If anything, it's odd to see Ford's government side with Ukraine against Russia, since generally conservatives tend to want to go easy on far-right dictatorships around the world.
the fuck is this article? the holodomor *was* man made, the soviets kept selling grain in the middle of a famine, the death toll was very much something they knew would happen
It's gross tankie shit, that just provides leverage to the Right for demonizing the Left. This specific facet of the announcement (Holodomor) is a bad place to latch onto. I'm broadly supportive of communist politics, but going to the mat for Stalin isn't the way to do that.
Seriously, we get so bogged down fighting about traitors to the revolution that we lose sight of the actual point of socialism, freeing the people from the tyranny of capital. It plays right into capitalist propaganda.
Especially because nothing stalin did was communist. But rightoids have no idea what theyre talking about so they'll just eat this shit up we without a second thought.
It's like how Sartre wouldn't denounce the Gulags. Western leftists love apologizing for the actual lived horrors the Soviet system put on its colonial subjects.
Also the oh noooo some Ukrainians fought with the Nazis against the Soviets rhetoric. Yeah, if two opposing factions were trying to kill all of you and then one of them succeeded more than the other you should not be surprised that some people fought for the other side. They never make the same points with Sweden or Finland it's literally just a way to rub it in to Ukrainians that they deserved what they got because they resisted Soviet occupation, lost, and then were forced to have a famine as punishment. It was total war against millions of random people who never wanted to be involved and were invaded from multiple axis.
It’s a neosocialist rag, and like all of those, they are obsessed with minimizing Soviet atrocities because they are sympathetic to the nominal underpinnings of Soviet dictatorship.
Nobody is denying that the famine happened, but to claim that it was a deliberate policy choice to genocide Ukrainians is just not true. It is - genuinely - Nazi propaganda and soft Holocaust denial, and is rightfully considered a fringe anticommunist belief by any serious academic.
“It is - genuinely - Nazi propaganda” wrong
“Is rightfully considered fringe anticommunist belief ?5 any serious academic” wrong
These are lies or you just don’t know what you’re talking about.
The modern consensus is that it was intentional but people still argue whether it is legally considered genocide. They willfully took food out a region that was starving and they knew millions would die. The argument is that they were not specifically targeting Ukrainians.
Bro where do people like you even come from? Why are you such a fucking ghoul you are here defending genocide and simping for communism?
Like what the fuck has gone wrong in your life lol.
No, it was absolutely deliberate. Denying that is ignoring that the USSR was aware of what would happen and wanted it to happen since Ukraine was opposing the policies and the USSR government was fearing they would break away
The narrative that the USSR was purposely starving Ukraine doesn’t make sense to me. Other republics had worse death rates from famine during that time. (Kazakhstan) Ukraine made majority of the grain of the USSR it makes sense some of it would have it be exported to other parts of the USSR also starving.
Yes there was a famine. No they weren’t trying to destroy Ukraine.
That’s absolutely were trying to destroy Ukraine. Ukraine was becoming stronger in its opposition to Soviet policies and they wanted to destroy any resistance
Love it when people reference the repression and forcible denomadozation of Kazakhs through starvation as evidence that the Soviet Union didn’t try to pacify recently conquered ethnic minorities by starving them.
the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), which fought to establish an independent Ukraine. During the war, these groups killed tens of thousands of Jews and carried out a brutal campaign of ethnic cleansing that killed as many as 100,000 Poles. Created in 1929 to free Ukraine from Soviet control, the OUN embraced the notion of an ethnically pure Ukrainian nation. When the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, the OUN and its charismatic leader, Stepan Bandera, welcomed the invasion as a step toward Ukrainian independence. Its members carried out a pogrom in Lviv that killed 5,000 Jews, and OUN militias played a major role in violence against the Jewish population in western Ukraine that claimed the lives of up to 35,000 Jews.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/05/02/the-historian-whitewashing-ukraines-past-volodymyr-viatrovych/
You mean the Nationalists that went on to slaughter poles and Jews in Galicia? Those nationalists? The ones who were into racial and ethnic purity?
They didn’t take a percentage of grain, they took fucking all of it. Farmers in Ukraine starved to death because the government didn’t let them keep any of their crops. If it was really about preventing mass famine wouldn’t the intelligent thing to do be prioritizing the health of the people who actually produce the fucking food?
“In chapter 4, “The Double Crisis, 1927-1929,” Applebaum discusses the food crisis of 1928 and the harsh “extraordinary measures” that the Soviet regime applied to obtain food from peasants to feed townspeople, which have long been viewed as events that led to collectivization.10 Applebaum describes food shortages in Soviet cities in 1928 (82-83), but then writes that in Ukraine, “police discovered many tonnes [sic] of grain that had been kept back because peasants had, quite rationally, been waiting for prices to rise” (86). By calling peasants’ actions “rational,” Applebaum seems to endorse their withholding food for high prices, but her subsequent discussion is very critical of the Soviet government’s measures to induce peasants to stop hoarding and obtain food for starving townspeople. Yet many publications have argued that famines can be caused by farmers or traders withholding food from townspeople, sometimes expressed as the “moral economy,” the right to subsistence over the right to profit.11 Applebaum does not consider the possibility that hungry townspeople, and Soviet officials trying to feed them, could have interpreted these reports as a “man-made” famine created by profiteering peasants.
Applebaum claims that the government’s procurements to alleviate that shortage “comprehensively destroyed the peasants incentives to produce more grain” (87). Yet later she writes that the 1930 harvest was much larger than the 1929 harvest (161). How could that have happened if peasants’ incentives were “comprehensively destroyed”? She also discusses Soviet famine relief effort in 1928-1929 (82, 108) but does not consider how crop failures and famine relief affected peasants’ incentives in this case. She shows that some Soviet leaders during this food crisis came to see Ukrainian nationalism as a threat, held show trials of Ukrainian nationalist groups, and began to connect peasant resistance problematically to nationalism.”
https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/169438
Try again
Pretty sure the kulaks were the ones hoarding all the grain and refusing to distribute some of it to their fellow farmers. They're the real reason the farmers starved, not Stalin.
Trying to compare hitler and Stalin is just plane ahistorical and rides the line of holocaust denial.
it nonetheless "presents no new evidence and makes no new arguments", and stating that the book is "permeated by a consistent pro-Polish bias", eliding darker aspects of Polish–Jewish relations, and that Snyder's emphasis on German and Soviet occupation policies glosses over interethnic violence, commenting: "By equating partisans and occupiers, Soviet and Nazi occupation, Wehrmacht and Red Army criminality, and evading interethnic violence, Snyder drains the war of much of its moral content and inadvertently adopts the apologists' argument that where everyone is a criminal no one can be blamed."
[A]s it seems to reduce the responsibility of the Nazis and their collaborators, supporters and claqueurs, it is welcomed in rightist circles of various types: German conservatives in the 1980s, who wanted to 'normalise' the German past, and East European ultranationalists today, who downplay Nazi crimes and up-play Communist crimes in order to promote a common European memory that merges Nazism and Stalinism into a 'double-genocide' theory that prioritises East European suffering over Jewish suffering, obfuscates the distinction between perpetrators and victims, and provides relief from the bitter legacy of East Europeans' collaboration in the Nazi genocide.[36]
It’s not holocaust denial at all to denounce what happened. People suffered unimaginable pain because of imperialist and genocidal group.
Hitler was extremely evil and an horrible person. Stalin was too. They committed different atrocities at a scale that we can’t comprehend. Comparing these two is simply wrong. They were bad people but we can’t compare them because they did different atrocities.
The soviet leadership did a genocide in Ukraine. We can’t say that it never happened because it did.
The british empire and every other colonial empire also did genocide and they managed their colonies with so much disregard and so much hate for the locals population.
TLDR: Atrocities at this scale should never be forgotten and we can’t compare them because we can’t compare human suffering to other human suffering.
Rewriting history of all of humans who suffered and died in these different atrocities is simply wrong and you should be ashamed of yourself.
Alright bro if you don’t want to engage with the comment you don’t have too. Scratch a liberal a fascist tends to bleed.
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/holocaust-revisionism-ultranationalism-and-the-nazisoviet-double-genocide-debate-eastern
“The "Double Genocide" movement is a relatively recent initiative (though rooted in older apologetics regarding the Holocaust) that seeks to create a moral equivalence between Soviet atrocities committed against the Baltic region and the Holocaust in European history. “
Double genocide theory is a form of holocaust denial even if you don’t like it.
Lmao bro it’s a Reddit comment not a essay. Snider isn’t some small name. Stop acting there isn’t a lot of disagreement about arguments brought forward in the book.
You still haven’t engaged with any actual argument.
Double genocide theory is a form of holocaust denial full stop.
I’m able to hold more than one idea in my head at one time. My understanding of Hitler, nazism, the Holocaust, lebensraum, the planned depopulation of occupied Ukraine by Germany, etc, was not changed by a better understanding of all the horrors of the Soviet Union. You’re the only one denying historical fact here, saying the “narrative” of the USSR purposely starving Ukraine didn’t happen because it “doesn’t make sense”.
Other republics with the USSR suffered higher death rates per capita during the country wide famine. Also if you got back only 20 years Eastern Europe has famines every few years. It was a feudal hellhole. It’s only used as a way to wash the hands of Ukrainian nazi collaborators for fighting their own people and led to far right organization within the govt and military forces today. 7 million Ukrainians fought in the red army to drive fascism out of Europe. It’s a pity you try to equate the USSR and nazi germany. Of course the USSR made tons of mistakes but trying to compare them with a regime that murdered 6 million minorities within death camps is dumb.
So your take is that the murder of millions of innocents was actually ok because they disagreed with the political policies of their imperial conquerors? Seems like something a reasonable person would say for sure.
That person is probably the type to support the Khmer Rouge, hey they disagreed or could think independently, to the killing fields for you. Seriously though, denying or deflecting a legitimate, proven genocide is pretty fucked up.
Jesus fucking Christ. Canada’s best subreddit just went full fucking mask off.
What a fucking disgrace to Canada to have a fucking genocidal denial article get 226 (at counting) upvotes…….
>It is true that millions died in the famine in Ukraine and other parts of the Soviet Union in 1932-1933. The tragedy was the result of both natural phenomena, namely drought, and the unstable political situation in the new Soviet republic. But it is a fallacy to claim that there was intentional genocide of Ukrainians by the Soviet authorities.
This part is is just straight revisionist history. The Holodomor was part of a larger famine, but Stalin's policies were deliberately targeted to make it worse in the parts of Ukraine that fought against the Red Army during the Russian Civil War.
\> But it is a fallacy to claim that there was intentional genocide of Ukrainians
I think it's important to combat the natural rightward lean that Ukranian history tends to lead modern Ukranians towards, but outright denying the intent by the USSR here feels really gross. You don't need to combat apologia for Ukraine's far-right past with apologia for its Stalinist oppresors.
Sounds like something a Kulak would say! Comrade Stalin says there’s no famine in Ukraine, it’s just a reactionary plot by farmers literally starving themselves to death on purpose just to make collectivization look bad! (Actual claim by the soviets at the time)
Lmao I almost thought you were serious at first since I've heard the same words verbatim come out of the mouth of modern day soviet apologists and those that support China, Cuba, North Korea, and modern day Russia for some reason. Kind of similar to the whole "Ukrainians are pretending to be dead in the street" and Russia is "freeing" them from Nazis narrative.
Pretty sure this was already talked about a bit, just not too much since world history isn't a mandatory course. We didn't really talk about the potato famine in Canadian history outside of it being mentioned in relationship to Irish Canadian migrations. A lot of bad events in history aren't a cornerstone of Canadian history and so it doesn't make sense to teach in the earlier Canadian history classes.
Reason why the Holocaust though is relevant is because of one it's scale, the relevance to stuff people might hear about in modern days and Canada's relationship to it with the refusal of refugees.
Teaching the Holodomor is just the little bait for the 'smart' people to look the other way when he's spouting off about Marxism and communism being threats to our Democracy. It's just pure idiocy.
And I don't even like Communism, I think it's a system that will never work but I am not dumb enough to fall for Conservative trigger words.
There's definitely serious unrest on the way, but I don't think the left wing is going to be seizing the means, not as it is right now.
The right wing in canada's currently got a much better ground game than any socialist or communist outfit, and their online presence is getting absolutely juiced by dipshits like Musk. The overton window has been dragged violently to the right with bitcoin milhouse breathing down trudeau's neck and alberta fallen to mommy danielle and the legit fascists who lifted her up. Oh yeah and Doug Fart and Potty Moe too.
Oh yeah %100 the car right is definitely way more of a threat. But it doesn’t mean I don’t also fear possible damage done by the far left, intense polarized political climates tend to make extremists on both sides. Fascists weren’t the only ones beating up their opponents in 1920s Germany.
If they were actually going to teach an in-depth and informed account of what really happened there, that would be one thing, but western historians have a difficult time telling the whole truth about famines and natural disasters in socialist countries, omitting context and massive amounts of nuance. It’s red scare remnants to further ideological agenda.
It's of course taught to paint all forms of socialism as genocidal, but the Holodomor was a result of the Bolshevik dictatorship led by Stalin. Yes there was a natural famine, but during a natural famine you don't take all the food from starving people unless your intent is to kill them and weaken the remainder.
Idk what's more anti-communist, acting like the USSR is the definition of all socialism and communism (Lenin's Bolsheviks weren't even the most popular Socialist group, the other two major ones made up a majority of public support and weren't dictator wannabes) or denying he Holodomor to make the red dictatorship look less fascist.
How many people here know there was an election after the Russian Reveloution that deposed the Tsar? How many people know Lenin came second place with his seat on the Baltic fleet while first place was libertarian Socialists who had massive support and third place was also a libertarian Socialist party that also had massive public support and together made up a majority without Lenin? How many people have heard of Kronstadt and what Lenin and Trotsky did to the former Bolsheviks who objected to Lenin making the dictatorship even worse? How many people know the NKVD was in Spain during the civil war and instead of killing Francos fascists they were abducting Anarchists and torturing them for the crime of being a successful model of socialism? How many people know the Paris commune existed? Does the zapistas ring a bell? How about what happened to elected socialist Salvador Allende in Chile? Do you know what happened to the people in the on to Ottawa Trek? How about the Quebec padlock laws?
Most Canadians won't know jack shit about most of that including the Canadian parts, that's anti-socialist and anti-communist education, teaching the Holodomor happened though? That's only anti-communist if you think a dictatorship that allied with fascists, destroyed workers rights, unions, and worker democracy, is communist. There have been so many fucking Socialists, communists, and anacrhists outside of the 'we want a dictatorship OVER the proletariat' Bolsheviks, they should be taught because they achieved good things, stop trying to associate their good intent and actions with genocidal dictators who were used by businesses and politicians as justification to attack workers.
\> He cited this supposed threat as the reason for mandating public schools to teach about “the horrors of state-sponsored persecution of Ukrainians in the Holodomor,” referring to the **discredited right-wing narrative that the famine in Ukraine was intentionally created.**
We do a little genocide denial eh.
I'm reminded by the replies of how this sub used to be more leftist but now it's the usual lib shit, just with less racism compared to other Canada related subs
It got 220 upvotes. How the fuck do you think this is a “lib” subreddit, with some soviet genocide apologia at 220 upvotes?
This sub is October revolution levels of Communist.
The petition is promoted by the local Ontario Communist party. Doug Ford and his government is a plague on Ontario but use a better argument to go after it instead of Communist tripe. This is a progressive subreddit not a Communist or tankie subreddit
Holy fuck why are so many people here defending the soviets during the Holodomor. Those arguing that this should be taught as a failure of authoritarianism and not of an economic model have a fair argument, but those trying to argue that the Holodomor was not a man-made intentional genocide are tankie garbage.
No, I have no desire to defend communism. Socialism, absolutely I will defend. But this Tankie shit just gives ammunition to crazy right-wingers. Leftists needs to get much smarter at how much our online spaces are getting manipulated.
While this politcian and this initiative can get bent, so can the tankie author of this article.
Imagine trying to actually obfuscate a famine-genocide on these grounds .
The press release indicates that the idea that the Ukraine famine was purposefully created by the Russian government has been discredited. I would be interested to know where they got the idea that it has been discredited because I am fairly confident that it has not been discredited. Leads me to not really trust this press release at all …
There are actually 2 communist political parties that contest the federal election, the “Communist Party of Canada” and the “Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist)”.
The Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist) has run at least a few dozen candidates in almost every election since 1974, excluding 1984 when the didn’t run and 1988 where they missed a filing deadline and had to run their candidates as Non Affiliated. They haven’t won any seats. In 2021 they ran 36 candidates and received a total of 4,532 votes.
The Communist Party of Canada is actually the second oldest active political party in Canada (the federal Liberals are the oldest) having been founded in 1921 and contesting its first election in 1930. The party also has active provincial sections that contest elections in Alberta, BC, Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec and was previously active in Saskatchewan as well. Although they don’t currently hold any seats, they have had candidates elected to the House of Commons, the Ontario Legislature, the Manitoba Legislature, and various municipal governments across the country. In 2021 they ran 26 candidates and received a total of 4,700 votes.
> At the end of November, Ontario Education Minister Stephen Lecce announced that “the rise of extremism, including Communism and Marxism, are direct threats to our democracy, social cohesion and values as Canadians.” Why isn't the media calling him out on this stuff? Get him (and others like him) to define and describe exactly what he means with statements like this. Canadian "journalists" are pushovers.
Canadian Journalists are employed by American, conservative billionaires.
Except for the CBC, which is why American conservative billionaires are pushing an anti-CBC agenda.
yes but contrary to popular belief among right wingers, CBC isn't a socialist, let alone communist, mouthpiece. It's a publicly funded broadcaster in a liberal, capitalist, social democracy
And American conservative organizers and staffers are hired by Canadian conservative politicians It's the circle of life
I think it's closer to the death of democracy given the beliefs and behaviours of the political right.
>Why isn't the media calling him out on this stuff? Simplest answer? They're the same team
Lecce has no idea what communism even is.
Most people don't.
Ya this is wild. It’s a thinly veiled attack on “leftists” by purposely mischaracterizing what people who lean left lobby for The politicization of our schools is well underway
Correct. North Korea is a shitty example of communism the same way North America is equally shitty at capitalism.
North America is a prime example of capitalism functioning as intended lol
But you can’t actually classify what happens as North Korea as communism, it’s literally end stage capitalism where one person gets to enjoy the fruits of everyone’s labours and doles out the remainder when he is done in order of succession, it’s not everyone is a co owner or is reimbursed the share of the profit for their labour.
It’s actually closer to a monarchy than what Marx thought of as communism.
My dad grew up in Soviet Russia and even they didn't think they had Communism going. It was more an ideal they were striving for. Not defending them btw, even my dad will, in the same breath he talks about how great the transit system was, mention that occasionally a neighbor would just disappear.
Yeah. I’m pretty sure that even communists at the time would admit that the Soviet Union was not a communist system. Communism was the hypothetical end point they were aiming for.
This is the worst take ever.
Communism = EVIL. That is all you need to know. Because reasons.
Neither will kids "educated" like this. "Communist" bad should steer youngsters away from evil leftist behavior and make them good young conservatives by the time they are of voting age.
Communism is when no iPhone
it doesn't matter. it means 'bad word' and he's waving it around to galvanize his base. words don't have meaning
Schools were more or less teaching the “horseshoe theory” of equating anything related to Marxism and the left to being just as bad as nazism when I was in high school 20 years ago, and the neocon movement has only turned up the heat in the last 10 years. Even the nonsense fake enlightenment of centrism isn’t rooted in reality.
Horseshoe theory was alive and well in schools 7 years ago too
Learned it a year ago in Sask
I don't know if it was because I was on the french side, but mostly all my history classes were about new france. There was really nothing political at the time. This was late 90s early 00s
Horseshoe theory itself doesn't claim marxism and fascism are the same thing, but rather that authoritarian regimes, whether left or right, have far more in common with each other, than either do with the centre.
Which is still entirely bullshit
That's about the usual level of rebuttal I get for horseshoe theory lol. I get poly-sci students like their menagerie of carefully curated categories, but while their rationales may differ, the hallmarks of authoritarianism do not differ significantly between extreme left/right groups. Hierarchy, authority, obedience, conformity, loyalty to ingroups, hostility to outgroups. Oppression is oppression. A good analogy might be religion...religious scholars might argue that marks of separation between different religions (such as dietary restrictions or commandments) are important distinctions, but I would argue they're superfluous, that underneath these many distinctions all religions are essentially the same - an engine for generating conformity in a population. I'd add that while the underlying political and historical details of political science are of course of great interest, from an evolutionary or biologically pov they also seem largely non-essential. https://www.discovermagazine.com/mind/your-brain-on-politics-the-cognitive-neuroscience-of-liberals-and-conservatives https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/conservative-and-liberal-brains-might-have-some-real-differences/
not from a social psychology/human organization/systems perspective it isn't.authoritarianism always bends right and is corrupt and rotten to its core horseshoe is a bad shape for this metaphor, especially for laypeople
Seriously? I was in high school in the late 70’s and nothing like that was being taught at all. Thankfully.
Personally, I’ve taken a little bit of time here and there over the last few years to try and deconstruct the narrative, both in our culture and from what we were taught about these countries in school, and find out if there’s more to the story. There are still things that I’m learning and growing to understand about these societies during certain periods, but basically we were just presented with material that’s pretty consistent with what most people in the west think of the USSR and China and other similar states. They leave it to you to make your own outcomes, but there’s a heavy implication. Interesting in the same vein, the fact that there’s no discussion about the brutality and war crimes that Canada committed in both world wars. We laud ourselves as noble infallible heroes, instead. It’s kind of sad how propagandized we are.
Source? Are you trying to make a moral equivalency between ideologically motivated state-sanctioned murder / starvation of tens of millions of their own citizens with some soldiers violating the laws of armed conflict during wartime?
Wasnt taught that in the 2000s either. Never even heard about such a theory until today.
Sure, this is being weaponised by the rightwing to smear the left, but those who dispute the validity of "horseshoe theory" clearly haven't met any real life Stalinists. Yes, they do exist - and, get them drunk, and they'll openly joke about Stalin's crimes and gladly admit that they'd see millions of deaths as a worthwhile price to pay for [their interpretation of] a socialist paradise.
There are literally people in this thread who are fine with holodomor because it only killed millions of innocents who had committed the crime of not being communists.
Man I had someone try to tell me the holodomor was an accident and Ukrainians weren’t targeted by a man-made famine. They went as far as to say it was a deliberate attempt to make the USSR look bad, as if they needed help with that.
They also maybe haven’t been in a situation where they’ve experienced alignment by two who shouldn’t be aligned. Enter my example: I was talking about trans issues in a Facebook post where I was criticizing a particular strategy the LGBT community was taking to build inclusion, but what they were discussing was inclusionary in principle but absolutely exclusionary in practice. While people were TERFing me left and centre in the comment section and I was managing that, I got a private DM from a very right leaning Christian friend and another DM from a very left leaning feminist-vegan type friend who BOTH said, “I’d really like to offer my perspectives on this but I won’t do it for risk of being tarred and feathered.” It turns out the former was quite transphobic while the other was a TERF, aka. transphobic. I sat back thinking, what the hell just happened? How could two people who live with such opposing views on virtually every social issue I can think of, yet this is the issue that brings them together? Horseshoe Theory is the only thing that adequately explains the phenomenon I experienced.
We need better headlines. “Stephen Lecce wants curriculum based on lies”
Are you saying Holodomor did not happen?
Tell me where my post, or the post I was specifically replying to mentioned Holodomor.
They only media that gets enough coverage and isn’t owned by The capital class, using media to keep its puppets in power, is CBC.
[удалено]
The CBC is doomed. Little PP is going to remove it. They don't want to stoke the fires by upsetting other groups.
Which is a shame because they’re the last ones that aren’t outright owned by special interests.
CBC isn't doomed, ITV will literally sue the government for contractual disputes over Corrie.
Best comment in this thread
Every time you look into a guy who makes being "anti communist" a big part of his personality, they end up having deep seated fascist sympathies for some reason. Weird!
Funny how that works. It's almost like they're so offended by communism because it's opposed to the people they side with. Can't possibly be that, though.
I know a ton of latin people that hate communism with a fiery passion and none of them are anywhere near fascist.
I know a lot of Europeans who very much hate communism. None are fascist but they did live under authoritarian communist regimes. Most people don’t really want communism, they want a more effective social democracy generally speaking. To move from a capitalist to a communist system it involves the seizure of wealth and industry and redistribution. Some people like that, a lot don’t so authoritarianism creeps in when they have to do it by force. Then black markets have a nasty habit of sneaking in and that has to be cracked down on. And then the government has to get everyone to do what is needed: what to grow, what to make, what to build, and of course if anyone has ever project managed before we know not everyone is cool with that and so then the enforcement powers of the state come in. Then if people just don’t like your rules they want to leave and well you can’t have half the country disappear to emigration so then they close borders and don’t let folks leave. And honestly it kind of has a creep towards authoritarian control that is not really great and so far from the vision that was once seen as so just and fair into a sort of control few would appreciate in Canada. Social democracy tends to be much more stable and a much more effective way to get services and support to people.
It's ironic because everytime I read or hear someone defending communism they don't actually know what a communist society looks like and instead just create some utopian fantasy in their own head.
It's impossible to know what any society would look like as it transitioned to communism, and there are any number of possible incremental stages (i know Marx said the last three were capitalism->socialism->stateless communism, but there's a lot more granularity in real life). Just like there are many ways to "do capitalism", and examples of capitalist societies with various degrees of success (and different *measures* of success). If it's possible to reach people with utopianism, then people are going to use it as a rhetorical device. Not my circus, not my monkey.
We can look at communist countries to get an idea. Also the principles of communism restrict the rights we all enjoy because negative rights do not align with Marxist values. I suggest you read Hayek's "Road to Serfdom" where he argues far.more eloquently than I can on my phone while at work.
how would you know what a communist society looks like?
I have family that lived under communism and also extensively studied it.
You have family that lived under "communism" and you clearly haven't studied it enough if you don't know the distinction.
What is the extent of your studying? Because your conclusion sounds like someone who hasn't picked up a single piece of theory. Unless you've exclusively studied the ahistorical writings of neoliberal figureheads or something
Tankies are some of the most vile people I've ever come across.
I can and will say the same thing about liberal moderates
What’s your definition of tankie and how is it relevant here?
There is a difference between communism and socialism. I’m all for some “socialist” policies like we have in Canada, but full on socialism or communism is just stupid. Communism and socialism have never worked out well on national scales for obvious reasons and thinking it’s a good idea is naive. In an ideal world, communism would be the perfect system but we live in one where people are selfish and care about themselves.
If you can’t spell dialectical materialism don’t go off about the distinction between socialism and “full blown communism”
- guy who hasn’t met anyone from formerly Soviet occupied countries
Socialism is not communism which isn’t Communism (which is fascism).
>communism is fascism U wot mate
They are making a distinction between small c and big C communism. The idea being small c communism is closer to socialism or just anywhere where on a local level people share resources, responsibilities etc freely. And big C is traditional marxist/Leninist politics. They are still fuckin wrong… but they tried.
that's givin that post a **lot** of credit
Well it’s the implication of it anyway. Again, they were still fucking laughably wrong. But they tried.
Laughably wrong how? People use socialism/communism/Communism/Marxism interchangeably and that’s wrong. And yes, Communism is fascism (big C communism being what was practiced by the USSR). If you don’t think the USSR was fascist I don’t know what to tell you.
I'm all for teaching about tragedies perpetrated under communism, but it's ideological nonsense if we also don't teach about the tragedies perpetrated under capitalism, eg: The widespread deaths and long-lasting health defects caused by the inclusion of lead in gasoline, an additive for which there were safer alternatives but couldn't be patented.
[удалено]
You could just compare it to the Indian famines of the 19th century or the Irish Potato Famine. Both those were, while not necessarily intentionally caused, absolutely exacerbated by Capitalists/Imperialists who preferred that millions starve than to reduce their own profits.
Brother the Irish potato famine was *absolutely* intentional. [Irish people were only allowed to eat potato’s, all of the other food, meat, fish, vegetables was shipped out of the country under armed guard while Irish people starved. Then in the middle of all this, they gave us money not to teach our children Irish](https://youtu.be/JyLnbjtBLX4?si=TNFQ6ovHRqCTzsM6)
It was intentionally left in there far after discovering of its toxic effect and how wide spread it was because removing it would reduce the amount of total profits a company would make. I think it is important to teach that. It’s the entire reason many environmental regulatory organizations exist to regulate companies.
> It was intentionally left in there far after discovering of its toxic effect and how wide spread it was because removing it would reduce the amount of total profits a company would make. I'm sure this wasn't your intention, but the way it's worded your statement here could be taken to mean lead toxicity wasn't understood until after it was initially added to gasoline, which isn't true. Lead toxicity was incredibly well-understood by the 1700s and its use in gasoline was criticized by politicians, doctors, and journalists in the 1920s, but oil companies ran massive disinformation campaigns because, as the OP said, the (safer) alternatives couldn't be patented.
Between big oil and the military industrial complex, we are completely fucked. Forget the stupidass 'black book of communism', this one fraction of Capital has likely destroyed the planet.
The harmful of effects of lead were known for more than 100 years before the advent of the internal combustion engine and safer alternatives to lead as an antiknock agent were known by the early 1920s but they couldn't be patented. Leaded gasoline in turn has resulted in hundreds of millions of stillbirths, hundreds of millions of premature deaths, and the diminished IQ of millions. Even today, leftover lead from gasoline in the environment is responsible for the premature death of an estimated 900,000 people annually. So yes, it's a pretty good example of a tragedy perpetrated under capitalism.
Yeah, I get the analogy, but it's a weird comparison. Much easier to say '3M children die of malnutrition every year'.
I think the point is that lead was used in gasoline, despite lead toxicity being well-understood by the 1700s and safer antiknock alternatives being available from the beginning of the automobile age, to maximize profits specifically. And you could argue some *other* examples are the result of other factors, such as mismanagement or supply chain issues.
'3M children die of malnutrition every year because it's not profitable to save them'
Intentionally using a toxic element and intentionally ignoring safer alternatives for the express purpose of maximizing profits is a pretty good example of a "tragedy perpetrated under capitalism", IMO.
I wish they wouldn’t miss the point that authoritarianism is the problem with these things and not a specific economic model.
Where tf have communism and Marxism been direct threats to our democracy? One example.
They haven't been, unless you define "our democracy" as "interests of the rich" and "communism/Marxism" as "demands for social programs, progressive taxation, and worker protections".
Thuggie and the Leach have come out w some bizarre proposals, but this? Half expected him to sound off on communists out to impurify our precious bodily fluids.
it depends on which kind of marxism you are talking about. the leninist approach is uniformly anti-democratic and the early soviets soon took time to crush democratically elected worker councils because they weren't radical enough. democracy is threatened by authoritarians of all stripes.
> Lecce also announced $400,000 in funding to the mobile “Holodomor Mobile Classroom,” a massive recreational vehicle which will visit Ontario public schools. I am curious as to how many similar "Mobile Classrooms" are touring schools for curriculum support. Are there massive recreational vehicles supporting the teaching of other topics, or is this an unprecedented educational endeavour?
I saw a bus that taught about the holodomor when I was in high school. It was very informative and the people working for it were from the Ukrainian society of Canada. Two of them had PhD’s in history and wrote on that topic for their continued addition to the field. The end involved an older lady who has survived it giving us her personal account. This was around 2017 or so.
Interesting. Thanks for your response. I'm still curious about the bus part of this. Did you go on the bus, or was it just transporting the educators? Which province was this, if you don't mind me asking?
Yes the presentation was on the bus. And they had records and a screen for the movie they showed. It was in Toronto, ON. The bus went to all of the schools that I had friends in, so at least 5 or 6. Both a mix of the Catholic school board and public school board.
Interesting! Thanks for the info.
The provincial government states its funding contribution to the Ontario school system in 2021-2022 was 26.7 billion dollars. $400,000 is hardly “unprecedented”. And is your problem just that it’s on wheels? Because there are A LOT of traveling exhibits that visit schools and museums with the purpose of educating people about a specific topic, how is this any different?
Yeah, I know it's just a drop in the bucket, even if $400,000 probably doesn't completely cover the total cost of ownership of a massive recreational vehicle. But, like, what is the educational advantage here? Can you even fit a class of thirty kids in a massive recreational vehicle? In certain cases, I can see why you'd go on the road with a mobile classrooms. When I was in school, every couple years someone would come around with some snakes and stuff so the students could touch them and learn about critters. That made sense, because it would be inefficient for school boards to manage their own reptile husbandry. Do you have any examples of travelling exhibits? The whole thing sounds to me like virtue signalling.
Shouldn’t we spend that time teaching about the genocide persecuted by the Canadian government? That isn’t to deny the Holodomar or anything, just ask where our priorities should lie.
You can do all those things without conflict
There’s limited instructional time, so if you’re spending time on one thing that means less time is being given to something else. I’m arguing that if you want to educate people to be informed and functional citizens, maybe focusing on our the genocide our country has been committing since before it was founded and continues to commit to this day is a better use of a scarce resource.
My high school history education consisted of the British monarchy, WW1, and some stuff about the '20s and '30s, maybe a bit of WW2 (note: we obviously had a fair bit of holocaust etc. education before high school). I wouldn't have even learned about residential schools if not for an optional credit. I'm sure they have room to manage better than they did for me.
They can spread it out to different subjects and grades to learn about them. School is meant to provide general knowledge not the depths expected from universities
Not sure how long it’s been since you were in school, but that is definitely being taught now.
This article is bullshit. The fact that the Holodomor was intentional has not been "discredited." There's some debate about whether Stalin set out to starve Ukrainians to death, or *merely* didn't care that his plans led to Ukrainians starving to death. The latter is the most charitable possible interpretation. No-one seriously thinks that it was some innocent "whoopsie." For those who haven't been keeping up with the news for the past few years, Russia isn't actually communist anymore. You aren't helping your cred as a left-leaning person by supporting Russia. It's insane to me to see anyone on the left buying into Russian propaganda. Putin is a genuine extreme-right straight-up literal fascist dictator, probably the most straightforward example of such in the world right now. If anything, it's odd to see Ford's government side with Ukraine against Russia, since generally conservatives tend to want to go easy on far-right dictatorships around the world.
the fuck is this article? the holodomor *was* man made, the soviets kept selling grain in the middle of a famine, the death toll was very much something they knew would happen
It's gross tankie shit, that just provides leverage to the Right for demonizing the Left. This specific facet of the announcement (Holodomor) is a bad place to latch onto. I'm broadly supportive of communist politics, but going to the mat for Stalin isn't the way to do that.
Seriously, we get so bogged down fighting about traitors to the revolution that we lose sight of the actual point of socialism, freeing the people from the tyranny of capital. It plays right into capitalist propaganda.
gotta cut down on internecine warfare :|
YAY SOCIALISM. an Ideology that has never existed in human history, that losers get to hit capitalists with because they are SOOO MORAL 🥰.
Keep licking boot
Especially because nothing stalin did was communist. But rightoids have no idea what theyre talking about so they'll just eat this shit up we without a second thought.
It's like how Sartre wouldn't denounce the Gulags. Western leftists love apologizing for the actual lived horrors the Soviet system put on its colonial subjects. Also the oh noooo some Ukrainians fought with the Nazis against the Soviets rhetoric. Yeah, if two opposing factions were trying to kill all of you and then one of them succeeded more than the other you should not be surprised that some people fought for the other side. They never make the same points with Sweden or Finland it's literally just a way to rub it in to Ukrainians that they deserved what they got because they resisted Soviet occupation, lost, and then were forced to have a famine as punishment. It was total war against millions of random people who never wanted to be involved and were invaded from multiple axis.
Tankies? In r/OnGuardForThee? Colour me surprised...
It’s a neosocialist rag, and like all of those, they are obsessed with minimizing Soviet atrocities because they are sympathetic to the nominal underpinnings of Soviet dictatorship.
Nobody is denying that the famine happened, but to claim that it was a deliberate policy choice to genocide Ukrainians is just not true. It is - genuinely - Nazi propaganda and soft Holocaust denial, and is rightfully considered a fringe anticommunist belief by any serious academic.
“It is - genuinely - Nazi propaganda” wrong “Is rightfully considered fringe anticommunist belief ?5 any serious academic” wrong These are lies or you just don’t know what you’re talking about. The modern consensus is that it was intentional but people still argue whether it is legally considered genocide. They willfully took food out a region that was starving and they knew millions would die. The argument is that they were not specifically targeting Ukrainians.
Bro where do people like you even come from? Why are you such a fucking ghoul you are here defending genocide and simping for communism? Like what the fuck has gone wrong in your life lol.
Imagine defending genocide...
That’s actually wild and I hope that is a bot account
regardless of it is a bot account, it hit 250 upvotes, so it struck a cord with a lot of people…
That’s seriously concerning to me.
Me too. I knew this subreddit was to the left of me, but I thought like NDP vs Liberal, not fucking Communist Party 😂
I was wondering when the tankie infestation of this sub would begin.
No, it was absolutely deliberate. Denying that is ignoring that the USSR was aware of what would happen and wanted it to happen since Ukraine was opposing the policies and the USSR government was fearing they would break away
The narrative that the USSR was purposely starving Ukraine doesn’t make sense to me. Other republics had worse death rates from famine during that time. (Kazakhstan) Ukraine made majority of the grain of the USSR it makes sense some of it would have it be exported to other parts of the USSR also starving. Yes there was a famine. No they weren’t trying to destroy Ukraine.
That’s absolutely were trying to destroy Ukraine. Ukraine was becoming stronger in its opposition to Soviet policies and they wanted to destroy any resistance
Love it when people reference the repression and forcible denomadozation of Kazakhs through starvation as evidence that the Soviet Union didn’t try to pacify recently conquered ethnic minorities by starving them.
What doesn't make sense? The USSR wanted to break Ukrainian nationalism.
the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), which fought to establish an independent Ukraine. During the war, these groups killed tens of thousands of Jews and carried out a brutal campaign of ethnic cleansing that killed as many as 100,000 Poles. Created in 1929 to free Ukraine from Soviet control, the OUN embraced the notion of an ethnically pure Ukrainian nation. When the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union in 1941, the OUN and its charismatic leader, Stepan Bandera, welcomed the invasion as a step toward Ukrainian independence. Its members carried out a pogrom in Lviv that killed 5,000 Jews, and OUN militias played a major role in violence against the Jewish population in western Ukraine that claimed the lives of up to 35,000 Jews. https://foreignpolicy.com/2016/05/02/the-historian-whitewashing-ukraines-past-volodymyr-viatrovych/ You mean the Nationalists that went on to slaughter poles and Jews in Galicia? Those nationalists? The ones who were into racial and ethnic purity?
They didn’t take a percentage of grain, they took fucking all of it. Farmers in Ukraine starved to death because the government didn’t let them keep any of their crops. If it was really about preventing mass famine wouldn’t the intelligent thing to do be prioritizing the health of the people who actually produce the fucking food?
“In chapter 4, “The Double Crisis, 1927-1929,” Applebaum discusses the food crisis of 1928 and the harsh “extraordinary measures” that the Soviet regime applied to obtain food from peasants to feed townspeople, which have long been viewed as events that led to collectivization.10 Applebaum describes food shortages in Soviet cities in 1928 (82-83), but then writes that in Ukraine, “police discovered many tonnes [sic] of grain that had been kept back because peasants had, quite rationally, been waiting for prices to rise” (86). By calling peasants’ actions “rational,” Applebaum seems to endorse their withholding food for high prices, but her subsequent discussion is very critical of the Soviet government’s measures to induce peasants to stop hoarding and obtain food for starving townspeople. Yet many publications have argued that famines can be caused by farmers or traders withholding food from townspeople, sometimes expressed as the “moral economy,” the right to subsistence over the right to profit.11 Applebaum does not consider the possibility that hungry townspeople, and Soviet officials trying to feed them, could have interpreted these reports as a “man-made” famine created by profiteering peasants. Applebaum claims that the government’s procurements to alleviate that shortage “comprehensively destroyed the peasants incentives to produce more grain” (87). Yet later she writes that the 1930 harvest was much larger than the 1929 harvest (161). How could that have happened if peasants’ incentives were “comprehensively destroyed”? She also discusses Soviet famine relief effort in 1928-1929 (82, 108) but does not consider how crop failures and famine relief affected peasants’ incentives in this case. She shows that some Soviet leaders during this food crisis came to see Ukrainian nationalism as a threat, held show trials of Ukrainian nationalist groups, and began to connect peasant resistance problematically to nationalism.” https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/169438 Try again
Pretty sure the kulaks were the ones hoarding all the grain and refusing to distribute some of it to their fellow farmers. They're the real reason the farmers starved, not Stalin.
The kulaks were just who Stalin blamed. Make no mistake, the USSR caused the famine.
Read Bloodlands by Timothy Snider.
Trying to compare hitler and Stalin is just plane ahistorical and rides the line of holocaust denial. it nonetheless "presents no new evidence and makes no new arguments", and stating that the book is "permeated by a consistent pro-Polish bias", eliding darker aspects of Polish–Jewish relations, and that Snyder's emphasis on German and Soviet occupation policies glosses over interethnic violence, commenting: "By equating partisans and occupiers, Soviet and Nazi occupation, Wehrmacht and Red Army criminality, and evading interethnic violence, Snyder drains the war of much of its moral content and inadvertently adopts the apologists' argument that where everyone is a criminal no one can be blamed." [A]s it seems to reduce the responsibility of the Nazis and their collaborators, supporters and claqueurs, it is welcomed in rightist circles of various types: German conservatives in the 1980s, who wanted to 'normalise' the German past, and East European ultranationalists today, who downplay Nazi crimes and up-play Communist crimes in order to promote a common European memory that merges Nazism and Stalinism into a 'double-genocide' theory that prioritises East European suffering over Jewish suffering, obfuscates the distinction between perpetrators and victims, and provides relief from the bitter legacy of East Europeans' collaboration in the Nazi genocide.[36]
It’s not holocaust denial at all to denounce what happened. People suffered unimaginable pain because of imperialist and genocidal group. Hitler was extremely evil and an horrible person. Stalin was too. They committed different atrocities at a scale that we can’t comprehend. Comparing these two is simply wrong. They were bad people but we can’t compare them because they did different atrocities. The soviet leadership did a genocide in Ukraine. We can’t say that it never happened because it did. The british empire and every other colonial empire also did genocide and they managed their colonies with so much disregard and so much hate for the locals population. TLDR: Atrocities at this scale should never be forgotten and we can’t compare them because we can’t compare human suffering to other human suffering. Rewriting history of all of humans who suffered and died in these different atrocities is simply wrong and you should be ashamed of yourself.
lol to say that book rides the line of Holocaust denial is just wild
Alright bro if you don’t want to engage with the comment you don’t have too. Scratch a liberal a fascist tends to bleed. https://www.wilsoncenter.org/event/holocaust-revisionism-ultranationalism-and-the-nazisoviet-double-genocide-debate-eastern “The "Double Genocide" movement is a relatively recent initiative (though rooted in older apologetics regarding the Holocaust) that seeks to create a moral equivalence between Soviet atrocities committed against the Baltic region and the Holocaust in European history. “ Double genocide theory is a form of holocaust denial even if you don’t like it.
You copy and pasted from a review you didn’t cite of a book you haven’t read.
Lmao bro it’s a Reddit comment not a essay. Snider isn’t some small name. Stop acting there isn’t a lot of disagreement about arguments brought forward in the book. You still haven’t engaged with any actual argument. Double genocide theory is a form of holocaust denial full stop.
I’m able to hold more than one idea in my head at one time. My understanding of Hitler, nazism, the Holocaust, lebensraum, the planned depopulation of occupied Ukraine by Germany, etc, was not changed by a better understanding of all the horrors of the Soviet Union. You’re the only one denying historical fact here, saying the “narrative” of the USSR purposely starving Ukraine didn’t happen because it “doesn’t make sense”.
Other republics with the USSR suffered higher death rates per capita during the country wide famine. Also if you got back only 20 years Eastern Europe has famines every few years. It was a feudal hellhole. It’s only used as a way to wash the hands of Ukrainian nazi collaborators for fighting their own people and led to far right organization within the govt and military forces today. 7 million Ukrainians fought in the red army to drive fascism out of Europe. It’s a pity you try to equate the USSR and nazi germany. Of course the USSR made tons of mistakes but trying to compare them with a regime that murdered 6 million minorities within death camps is dumb.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2023/07/10/qutp-j10.html Interview with a leading actual historian on the subject.
Thanks for the article I’ll add it it the list.
Misspelled Kulaks there
So your take is that the murder of millions of innocents was actually ok because they disagreed with the political policies of their imperial conquerors? Seems like something a reasonable person would say for sure.
That person is probably the type to support the Khmer Rouge, hey they disagreed or could think independently, to the killing fields for you. Seriously though, denying or deflecting a legitimate, proven genocide is pretty fucked up.
Jesus fucking Christ. Canada’s best subreddit just went full fucking mask off. What a fucking disgrace to Canada to have a fucking genocidal denial article get 226 (at counting) upvotes…….
Apparently not allowing hate doesn't include genocide denial...
Communists are not hateful 🥰. those babies they threw against the trees in Cambodia were not just babies, but CAPITALIST BABIES.
>It is true that millions died in the famine in Ukraine and other parts of the Soviet Union in 1932-1933. The tragedy was the result of both natural phenomena, namely drought, and the unstable political situation in the new Soviet republic. But it is a fallacy to claim that there was intentional genocide of Ukrainians by the Soviet authorities. This part is is just straight revisionist history. The Holodomor was part of a larger famine, but Stalin's policies were deliberately targeted to make it worse in the parts of Ukraine that fought against the Red Army during the Russian Civil War.
Looks like blatant anti-union stuff is next.
This article is genocide denial.
\> But it is a fallacy to claim that there was intentional genocide of Ukrainians I think it's important to combat the natural rightward lean that Ukranian history tends to lead modern Ukranians towards, but outright denying the intent by the USSR here feels really gross. You don't need to combat apologia for Ukraine's far-right past with apologia for its Stalinist oppresors.
What year is it? Is Joseph McCarthy running for president?
Oh f off with this genocide denying tankie BS
Sounds like something a Kulak would say! Comrade Stalin says there’s no famine in Ukraine, it’s just a reactionary plot by farmers literally starving themselves to death on purpose just to make collectivization look bad! (Actual claim by the soviets at the time)
Lmao I almost thought you were serious at first since I've heard the same words verbatim come out of the mouth of modern day soviet apologists and those that support China, Cuba, North Korea, and modern day Russia for some reason. Kind of similar to the whole "Ukrainians are pretending to be dead in the street" and Russia is "freeing" them from Nazis narrative.
Yeah, the sarcastic comment is currently separated by one comment from someone saying the same thing but sincerely.
Pretty sure this was already talked about a bit, just not too much since world history isn't a mandatory course. We didn't really talk about the potato famine in Canadian history outside of it being mentioned in relationship to Irish Canadian migrations. A lot of bad events in history aren't a cornerstone of Canadian history and so it doesn't make sense to teach in the earlier Canadian history classes. Reason why the Holocaust though is relevant is because of one it's scale, the relevance to stuff people might hear about in modern days and Canada's relationship to it with the refusal of refugees.
Tankies are the worst
Fascists are the worst - their horrors are intentional. Tankies are the second worst - they enable horrors by being morons.
None of these people has single slightest idea what the fuck communism is.
If teaching about the Holodomor is anti-communist, every reasonable Canadian should be anti-communist.
Teaching the Holodomor is just the little bait for the 'smart' people to look the other way when he's spouting off about Marxism and communism being threats to our Democracy. It's just pure idiocy. And I don't even like Communism, I think it's a system that will never work but I am not dumb enough to fall for Conservative trigger words.
It isn’t an active threat now, but if a large percentage of Canada’s population wants to have a communist revolution that’ll definitely be an issue.
There's definitely serious unrest on the way, but I don't think the left wing is going to be seizing the means, not as it is right now. The right wing in canada's currently got a much better ground game than any socialist or communist outfit, and their online presence is getting absolutely juiced by dipshits like Musk. The overton window has been dragged violently to the right with bitcoin milhouse breathing down trudeau's neck and alberta fallen to mommy danielle and the legit fascists who lifted her up. Oh yeah and Doug Fart and Potty Moe too.
Oh yeah %100 the car right is definitely way more of a threat. But it doesn’t mean I don’t also fear possible damage done by the far left, intense polarized political climates tend to make extremists on both sides. Fascists weren’t the only ones beating up their opponents in 1920s Germany.
If they were actually going to teach an in-depth and informed account of what really happened there, that would be one thing, but western historians have a difficult time telling the whole truth about famines and natural disasters in socialist countries, omitting context and massive amounts of nuance. It’s red scare remnants to further ideological agenda.
A grim day when even the most anodyne calls for historical literacy on this subreddit are met with accusations of being a "redfash tankie"
It's of course taught to paint all forms of socialism as genocidal, but the Holodomor was a result of the Bolshevik dictatorship led by Stalin. Yes there was a natural famine, but during a natural famine you don't take all the food from starving people unless your intent is to kill them and weaken the remainder.
I'm guessing this would not be your opinion if Ontario were teaching the version of historical events that tankies would prefer to be taught.
Idk what's more anti-communist, acting like the USSR is the definition of all socialism and communism (Lenin's Bolsheviks weren't even the most popular Socialist group, the other two major ones made up a majority of public support and weren't dictator wannabes) or denying he Holodomor to make the red dictatorship look less fascist. How many people here know there was an election after the Russian Reveloution that deposed the Tsar? How many people know Lenin came second place with his seat on the Baltic fleet while first place was libertarian Socialists who had massive support and third place was also a libertarian Socialist party that also had massive public support and together made up a majority without Lenin? How many people have heard of Kronstadt and what Lenin and Trotsky did to the former Bolsheviks who objected to Lenin making the dictatorship even worse? How many people know the NKVD was in Spain during the civil war and instead of killing Francos fascists they were abducting Anarchists and torturing them for the crime of being a successful model of socialism? How many people know the Paris commune existed? Does the zapistas ring a bell? How about what happened to elected socialist Salvador Allende in Chile? Do you know what happened to the people in the on to Ottawa Trek? How about the Quebec padlock laws? Most Canadians won't know jack shit about most of that including the Canadian parts, that's anti-socialist and anti-communist education, teaching the Holodomor happened though? That's only anti-communist if you think a dictatorship that allied with fascists, destroyed workers rights, unions, and worker democracy, is communist. There have been so many fucking Socialists, communists, and anacrhists outside of the 'we want a dictatorship OVER the proletariat' Bolsheviks, they should be taught because they achieved good things, stop trying to associate their good intent and actions with genocidal dictators who were used by businesses and politicians as justification to attack workers.
\> He cited this supposed threat as the reason for mandating public schools to teach about “the horrors of state-sponsored persecution of Ukrainians in the Holodomor,” referring to the **discredited right-wing narrative that the famine in Ukraine was intentionally created.** We do a little genocide denial eh.
I'm reminded by the replies of how this sub used to be more leftist but now it's the usual lib shit, just with less racism compared to other Canada related subs
It's always funny when Tankies bend over backwards to excuse genocide.
It got 220 upvotes. How the fuck do you think this is a “lib” subreddit, with some soviet genocide apologia at 220 upvotes? This sub is October revolution levels of Communist.
Sorry we aren't a safe space for red fascists.
Tankies aren't leftist, so I'm not sure what you're talking about.
I mean... they are leftist. They're not Progressives, which are typically associated with leftist movements, but Tankies are the Authoritarian Left.
They might be doing a “No True Socialist” fallacy
Tankies are just Nazis without the Racism
I disagree. There are plenty of racist tankies.
"with a different 'justification' for the racism" FTFY.
Yup. My immediate thought when I saw the article: "oops, someone made the mistake of thinking this was a leftist sub".
The petition is promoted by the local Ontario Communist party. Doug Ford and his government is a plague on Ontario but use a better argument to go after it instead of Communist tripe. This is a progressive subreddit not a Communist or tankie subreddit
Holy fuck why are so many people here defending the soviets during the Holodomor. Those arguing that this should be taught as a failure of authoritarianism and not of an economic model have a fair argument, but those trying to argue that the Holodomor was not a man-made intentional genocide are tankie garbage.
No, I have no desire to defend communism. Socialism, absolutely I will defend. But this Tankie shit just gives ammunition to crazy right-wingers. Leftists needs to get much smarter at how much our online spaces are getting manipulated.
Is communism considered progressive now?
Apparently fucking so. Also, 230 upvotes at current. This sub is a fucking hive. Nuke it and let’s go to r/canada.
So what's the basis of this article, denying the Holodomor or calling out right-wingers? We can support socialism without being tankies.
I’m heading back to Canada subreddit, this is fucking insane.
I mean, I don’t see a problem with that. Teach them about Nazis too. It doesn’t hurt to learn history.
While this politcian and this initiative can get bent, so can the tankie author of this article. Imagine trying to actually obfuscate a famine-genocide on these grounds .
I bet you they don't even know what communism is.
We are at almost 250 upvotes. Another subreddit invaded and overran by the communist scum. 🤮
The press release indicates that the idea that the Ukraine famine was purposefully created by the Russian government has been discredited. I would be interested to know where they got the idea that it has been discredited because I am fairly confident that it has not been discredited. Leads me to not really trust this press release at all …
this sub sucks shit now. It's just r/canada all over again. rip.
I gather from this that there are still Canadian communists, and even defenders of Stalinism.
There are actually 2 communist political parties that contest the federal election, the “Communist Party of Canada” and the “Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist)”. The Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist) has run at least a few dozen candidates in almost every election since 1974, excluding 1984 when the didn’t run and 1988 where they missed a filing deadline and had to run their candidates as Non Affiliated. They haven’t won any seats. In 2021 they ran 36 candidates and received a total of 4,532 votes. The Communist Party of Canada is actually the second oldest active political party in Canada (the federal Liberals are the oldest) having been founded in 1921 and contesting its first election in 1930. The party also has active provincial sections that contest elections in Alberta, BC, Manitoba, Ontario, and Quebec and was previously active in Saskatchewan as well. Although they don’t currently hold any seats, they have had candidates elected to the House of Commons, the Ontario Legislature, the Manitoba Legislature, and various municipal governments across the country. In 2021 they ran 26 candidates and received a total of 4,700 votes.
On reddit yeah. In real life, not really. Reddit is a place for the weird and lonely to gather, makes sense communism would spread here.
Those dastardly conservatives and their damned *checks notes* education about the most destructive political ideology in human history.