Under the statue of Christ in Spain appeared a giant poster with the faces of Stalin and Lenin.

This is on the level of Holocaust denial. Sad.

 

Sounds a lot like Holocaust denial

 

No, because he killed people based on race. He also lost. Not much to admire there.

 

German's Lufwaffe was deeply disturbed at the thought that America was producing 30,000 aircraft per year.
Can you identify the companies which did this astounding achievement?
And those 'liberty ships', two ships every three days wasn't it? Who built these?
And all those jeeps - they shoved thousands of them into the sea in the Phillipines in 1945, who built those?

You saying one American company was building military supplies for America, and down the road another
company was building same supplies for the Germans? Were they painting the swastikas on them too?

 

Of course I can't prove it. Only one Communist nation has provided us with data, and that was Cambodia.
And the reason was that another Communist nation overthrew the Cambodian Communist Party and sought
to justify it - hence the stats on, what, two million murders? Two weeks ago Putin shut down the memorial
group studying Stalin's grisly death count.
Stalin killed about 20 million. Mao killed about 80 million. That's not counting the horrendous death toll just
in seizing power, nor the many wannabe Stalins and Maos from Vietnam, Poland, the Baltics, Cuba etc..
Maybe 150,000,000 murdered or starved.
Yet you don't see mobs tearing down statues of Karl Marx, do you?

 

Any adequate person has critical thinking. And if a person has the ability to think, then in the question of the Holocaust, he asks several questions.
1. Jews died (according to the latest data. Their number is surprisingly increasing all the time.) About 6 million. That is why the Holocaust was declared. ... But about 28 million Russians died - there is no Holocaust. Why? The Chinese died, according to various sources, from 36 million to 41 million people - there is no Holocaust. Why?
2. Some say that the Jewish Holocaust happened because relatively big off the total number of dead Jews. This is a lie. For example, gypsies. They were also killed on a national basis. And the Gypsies killed out of the total number much more than the Jews - no Holocaust. Why?
Explain to me.
Or will you, as usual, write general, meaningless phrases?

 

In other words, you have nothing to say. However, this was expected.

 

Many rulers killed people on a racial basis. For example, the king of Belgium killed more Kenyans and Africans in general than Hitler. In order to force the Negro to work more, the Belgian colonists cut off the hands of the child of the working Negro. To make it work even more.
I won’t even talk about the British and their policy towards the Boers, Hindi ... etc.
Just one example - the British exterminated all the Tusmanians. (everyone, it means totally - there is not a single one left alive. Just like some species of animals are completely exterminated, so the British exterminated all the Tasmanians)
How many Indians were exterminated in the USA, I think you know better than me...

 

One and the same company (more precisely, companies. There were many of them) produced, for example, cars for the USA, and the same company produced (and repaired) cars for the Nazis in Germany. Or its subsidiary. Whether they painted the swastika or not, I don't know. I think if there was an order to draw, then they painted. I once saw one photo where at a subsidiary of Generals Motors, Opel, a car with a painted swastika rolled off the assembly line. Cars, of course, is a symbol.
Because American companies supplied Hitler with everything - from petroleum products to radio engineering (Intel and others). They also helped financially. Including Jewish bankers. Take the Warburg family, for example.
And at the end of the war, many Nazi criminals found refuge in the United States.

 

Our dialogue is meaningless. You keep quoting anti-Soviet posters. You cannot prove anything.
It's like if I said that Roosevelt killed 100 million Americans, and when asked to show evidence of this statement, I would begin to tell myths and refer to Senator McCarthy. Agree, it would look funny. Is not it?

 

Marx never killed anyone.
Nor never advocated it.
He did say the changes he suggested MAY have to come via a revolution. But he didn't campaign or encourage one.

The terrorist dictators mentioned above used Marxism to justify a revolution which did not result in a Marxist state.
They were simply insane power-mad cold blooded killers with something they thought sounded economically intelligent. Except they didn't develop any of Marx's theories.

Whether you like Marx's theories or not, is your personal choice.
Today they are proven not to work in practise.
But he DID offer, for the first time, a way of organising society that broke the historical class structure (which is why he was so interested in class).
It as the first time the peasantry could challenge the aristocrats, only so by chance of birth, and take power over their own lives.
As people who overthrew a King to claim freedom from class control, I would think you could appreciate what he did in Europe. After Marx, the grip on countries by born aristocratic families was broken.

 

So, obviously in 1942-5 American companies were not supplying Germany with anything.
What year did all this stop? When Hitler declared war on America in 1941?

 

Who are you replying to here? Use the 'Reply' if your comment is to be directed at someone.
There are founders of National Socialism who never killed anyone either - if they had statues
they would be pulled down. Marx is one of the founders of Communism - if we are going to pull
down statues of America's founders then Marx should be the first to go. I see it as a crime such
statues even exist.

 

Uh... why don't you mention the Mongols? They killed nearly 12% of all people alive on earth at that
time. And the Zulus with their scorched earth policies. Then there's the sadistic Commanches who
created an empire in Southern US and Northern Mexico, built largely on terror.

 

I was addressing a general point.
Marx didn't "found" America.
American was "founded" 200 years before Marx and once again, Marxist theory as never fully developed in any country.
Marx never killed anyone. He wrote pamphlets and books. That is all.
Whether and who took them as a guide to some future for their own country, was not Marx's issue. In fact he was dead before some named above as terrorists were terrorising.
Those who used his theories for their own ends did sometimes kill and often they almost rewrote what Marx had said in order to promise jam tomorrow.

 

Marx isn't the founder of America, but he is the founder of neo-Marxism - the hateful
oppressor-oppressed narratives we hear in universities, socialist groups and even in
parts of the Democrats today.
It's amazing the right wing has never sought to pull down his statues. They should do
so immediately.
His 'pamphlets and books' were enough. Look at how the enemies of the working class
should be 'made impossible.' What does that mean? He left it to those who bought his
oppressor/oppressed ideas to figure out for themselves. And they did, with over 100
million dead.

 

When Marx wrote, the enemies of the working class were the born aristocrats who were not tempered by human rights laws, who saw servitude as a right to control lives, who owned vast swathes of land , hired and fired according to personal preferences, had heating and lighting when the poor had neither.
I don't know what you mean by "neo-Marxism" and Marx wasn't responsible for any current interpretation.
Marx championed the oppressed and suggested an economy which would go a long way to liberate them and provide opportunity. In his day, ENEMIES of the working class should indeed be impossible. Social class should have no ENEMIES...there should not be a class war. But there had been for centuries.
What leaders of other countries did "in his name" was not his fault either. He wasn't alive when much of it happened.

 

Another fun fact: the German Kaiser helped fund the Bolshevik Revolution

 

??? The proletarian revolutions haven't occurred. Thats why we now have neo marxism in an attempt to shore up all that he got wrong.

 

Outrageous! Give the source of these figures!

 

Here:
With Stalins signature, 1417 people were condemned to death:


600 people were condemned to death with a stroke of a pen here:


And here, Stalin got a note saying, can we kill 5,000 (FIVE THOUSAND) people, pretty please? Grandpa Stalin wrote Yes and placed his blessing in the form of the signature Ct, that looks like Latin G. They didn’t list the names, or describe what these people did, they just threw a large number and he put his blessing on it!



Only mentally sick people would want to go back to communism!

 

USSR + China

 

But political tyranny is not the product of economic theory.
I absolutely accept the evil of genocide and state terrorism.
But Matx never advocated this. He never led a bloody revolution. Others did in his name.
Sure he said change may have to come via revolution but that was the design of Stalin. IOW don't shoot the messenger.
Communism doesn't advocate terror either. It is a theoretical economic system which suggests a classless society and more "power to the people". Far less control from the state.
Just what those who lean to the right want!

 

1937. Capital punishment was present. Especially with regard to anti-Soviet elements. What is the 37th year? This is a purge in the army, mainly in the Tukhachevsky case. That it was necessary to pat the soldiers on the head who were going to stage a coup? And this despite the fact that the USSR already knew that in 1939 a war would begin on the part of Germany. Well, also, of course, for the theft of socialist property. What is the problem? Or was it necessary to take them all, like Andrei Orlik, to London so that he could live there happily?

 

So, I take it that you are OK with murdering people on a wholesale level?