This is a Dengist community in favor of Bashar al-Assad with no information that can lead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton, our fellow liberal and queen. This community is not ironic. We are Marxists-Leninists.
This community is for posts about Marxism and geopolitics (including shitposts to some extent). Serious posts can be posted here or in /c/GenZhou. Reactionary or ultra-leftist cringe posts belong in /c/shitreactionariessay or /c/shitultrassay respectively.
We have a Matrix homeserver and a Matrix space. See this thread for more information. If you believe the server may be down, check the status on status.elara.ws.
Rules:
Welcome again to everybody! Make yourself at hotel. In the time-honoured tradition of our group, here is our weekly discussion thread.
● Matrix homeserver and space
● Theory discussion group on Matrix
● Find theory on ProleWiki, marxists.org, Anna's Archive and libgen
It's pretty bizarre how big an a emphasis The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact gets among EU neocons on
and twitter. They treat it like it's some kind of scientific truth of the horseshit theory. I don't remember people being this obsessed about it pre-2022. (And they clearly don't read much history.)
and they conveniently ignore that France and the rest signed pacts with the Nazis long before the USSR did and rejected all offers to cooperate with the USSR
IIRC, France had a secret agreement with the Soviets under which they would both defend Czechoslovakia in the event of a German invasion. But the plan depended on the support of the United Kingdom and Italy, which refused to help. In addition, Poland refused to allow Soviet troops to enter its territory to help Czechoslovakia.
Even if it were true, by any mathematical standard Germany had done way less genocide at the time so signing it was right. Bombing brittian was the only good things the nazis did.
The Soviets also had non-aggression pacts with the UK and France and, together with the UK, invaded and occupied Iran to prevent it from allying itself with Germany.