After the evidence I’ve shown you, calling it “invading Poland together with the Nazis” is honestly just lying. Ignoring that the territories returned were Ukrainian, Lithuanian and Belarusian for the overwhelming part is simply twisting history. It’s not “innocent poles getting oppressed by soviets”, it’s Ukrainians, Belarusians and Lithuanians being saved from Nazi invasion by Soviets. Again, answer this one question: what was the alternative to Soviet occupation of Eastern “Poland”. Please answer that.

You’re dishonest by refusing to entertaining the idea that the Soviets, as stated by Churchill, Chamberlain and Roosevelt, were not “collabbing with the Nazis”, but instead simply buying time to prepare for war. Evidence of the Soviet antifascist intervention on the opposite corner of the continent in the Spanish Civil War, the Litvinov doctrine, the collective security policy, pursued, the fact that the lands “invaded” weren’t even Polish for the most part, the mutual defense agreement with Czechoslovakia that made them want to start a collective war against Nazis which France refused, or asking yourself what was the alternative to Soviet occupation of the territories of Eastern Poland, none of this is enough.

And it’s not enough because you’re dishonest with your approach, because your starting point is “USSR bad, how can I justify this”, instead of “let’s look at the facts and reach a conclusion”. It doesn’t matter to you that Ukrainians and Belarusians overwhelmingly wanted to remain in the Soviet Union, you’ll still call them “unfree” because USSR bad. It doesn’t matter that the USSR saved Europe from fascism at the horrible cost of 25mn deaths, USSR bad. It doesn’t matter that literally every country in Europe had mutual nonaggression pacts with the Nazis at some point, history begins in 1939 and ends in 1941 because USSR bad. Munich Agreements don’t matter, Polish invasion of Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, Belarus and Lithuania doesnt matter, France rejecting to honor the Munich agreements doesnt matter, Spanish civil war doesn’t matter. Nothing matters, except for a 2-year interval in which the USSR was not at war with the Nazis.

What a serious historical analysis. Good job.

Ok, I’ve read through your comment and I’m a bit disappointed. You’re ignoring most of what I said, and your entire point is “but Poland, but Poland and but Poland”.

Your timeline conveniently starts in 1939 and ends in 1941, and you made no mention whatsoever of the Litvinov doctrine I brought up which explicitly was “seeking a collective security agreement with France and England against Nazis” for the entire 30s. You just reject the Spanish civil war as a nothingburger as if it weren’t the first antifascist war in Europe. You also don’t mention the Munich Agreements and somehow disregard the fact that France and Poland signed them with Hitler.

It’s not surprising Poland didn’t want Soviet troops in their country

Maybe it’s because Poland participated actively in the Munich agreements and got part of Czech land? By your own logic, Poland made an unforgivable deal with Hitler when invading Czechoslovakia. No blame there? History starts in 1939?

These countries weren’t free until FIVE DECADES LATER when the Soviet Union fell

Poland never belonged to the Soviet Union after the war, so your point is moot regarding Poland. As for Belarus and Ukraine, they respectively voted 83% and 71% IN FAVOR OF REMAINING IN THE SOVIET UNION IN THE 1991 REFERENDUM. What the hell are you talking about being free? Belarusian and Ukrainian people OVERWHELMINGLY DEMOCRATICALLY DECIDED TO BELONG IN THE SOVIET UNION. Please, tell me, how were Ukraine and Belarus not free?! Catalonia, for reference, recently had an independence referendum in which 50% of the population voted to leave Spain and the promoter of the referendum is a political refugee in Brussels. Please tell me in which fucking way Ukraine or Belarus weren’t free in the Soviet Union when they were two of the highest “yes” voters in the referendum.

You never addressed the public speeches by the leaders of France, USA and England admitting to what I’m saying. You never addressed the alternative to Eastern “Poland” (i.e. Belarus, Ukraine and Lithuanian territories) knowing that they would otherwise be invaded by Hitler, you never addressed the MILLION SOLDIERS that the Soviets offered and France rejected on exchange for a mutual defense agreement.

You simply ignored all of my comment, went on with the “but Motherboard-Ribbedcock” ignoring the history of the 10 previous years of consistent Soviet antifascist geopolitical position, and claim that the poor “Poles” (i.e. ethnic Ukrainians, Jews, Belarusians and Lithuanians) whose territories were returned to the Ukrainian, Belarusian and Lithuanian republics, were somehow oppressed Poles who somehow could have avoided Nazi genocide if it weren’t for Soviet intervention both in 1939 and in 1941.

I honestly expected a bit more of good faith from the exchange instead of doubling down on narrowing history to a skewed version of one treaty and ignoring the DEMOCRATIC WILL OF TENS OF MILLIONS OF VOTERS in the 1991 referendum by calling them “non-free” in the Soviet Union. So much for freedom.

Have you had time to read my other comment? I would appreciate some discussion if you have anything to say, I spent quite a while writing that

I’m gonna please ask you to actually read my comment and to be open to the historical evidence I bring (using Wikipedia as a source, hopefully not suspect of being tankie-biased), because I believe there is a great mistake in the way contemporary western nations interpret history of WW2 and the interwar period. Thank you for actually making the effort, I know it’s a long comment:

Should European countries have just sat on their ass and let Hitler do whatever he wanted?

They kinda did and that’s entirely my point: capitalist nations won’t do much to fight fascism. World War 2 wasn’t won by capitalist western-style democracies, it was communists, 80% of Nazi soldiers were defeated in the Eastern front!

They actually tried that, the Peace For Our Time declaration in 1938 made by England after Hitler took over large parts of Czechoslovakia

The only country who offered to start a collective offensive against the Nazis and to uphold the defense agreement with Czechoslovakia as an alternative to the Munich Betrayal was the USSR. From that Wikipedia article: “The Soviet Union announced its willingness to come to Czechoslovakia’s assistance, provided the Red Army would be able to cross Polish and Romanian territory; both countries refused.”

As a Spaniard leftist it’s so infuriating when the Soviet Union, the ONLY country in 1936 which actively fought fascism in Europe by sending weapons, tanks and aviation to my homeland in the other side of the continent in the Spanish civil war against fascism, is accused of appeasing the fascists. The Soviets weren’t dumb, they knew the danger and threat of Nazism and worked for the entire decade of the 1930s under the Litvinov Doctrine of Collective Security to enter mutual defense agreements with England, France and Poland, which all refused because they were convinced that the Nazis would honor their own stated purpose of invading the communists in the East. The Soviets went as far as to offer ONE MILLION troops to France (Archive link against paywall) together with tanks, artillery and aviation in 1939 in exchange for a mutual defense agreement, which the French didn’t agree to because of the stated reason. Please stop trying to rewrite history, the Soviets were BY FAR the most antifascist country in Europe.

The invasion of “Poland” is also severely misconstrued. The Soviets didn’t invade what we think of when we say Poland. They invaded overwhelmingly Ukrainian, Belarusian and Lithuanian lands that Poland had previously invaded in 1919. Poland in 1938, a year before the invasion:

“Polish” territories inavded by the USSR in 1939:

The Soviets invaded famously Polish cities such as Lviv (sixth most populous city in modern Ukraine), Pinsk (important city in western Belarus) and Vilnius (capital of freaking modern Lithuania). They only invaded a small chunk of what you’d consider Poland nowadays, and the rest of lands were actually liberated from Polish occupation and returned to the Ukrainian, Belarusian and Lithuanian socialist republics. Hopefully you understand the importance of giving Ukrainians back their lands and sovereignty?

Additionally, the Soviets didn’t invade Poland together with the Nazis, they invaded a bit more than two weeks after the Nazi invasion, at a time when the Polish government had already exiled itself and there was no Polish administration. The meaning of this, is that all lands not occupied by Soviet troops, would have been occupied by Nazis. There was no alternative. The Soviet invasion effectively protected millions of Slavic peoples like Poles, Ukrainians and Belarusians from the stated aim of Nazis of genociding the Slavic peoples all the way to the Urals.

All in all, my conclusion is: the Soviets were fully aware of the dangers of Nazism and fought against it earlier than anyone (Spanish civil war), spent the entire 30s pushing for an anti-Nazi mutual defence agreement which was refused by France, England and Poland, tried to honour the existing mutual defense agreement with Czechoslovakia which France rejected and Poland didn’t allow (Romania neither but they were fascists so that’s a given), and offered to send a million troops to France’s border with Germany to destroy Nazism but weren’t allowed to do so. The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact was a tool of postponing the war in a period in which the USSR, a very young country with only 10 years of industrialization behind it since the first 5-year plan in 1929, was growing at a 10% GDP per year rate and needed every moment it could get. I can and do criticise decisions such as the invasion of Finland, but ultimately even the western leaders at the time seem to generally agree with my interpretation:

“In those days the Soviet Government had grave reason to fear that they would be left one-on-one to face the Nazi fury. Stalin took measures which no free democracy could regard otherwise than with distaste. Yet I never doubted myself that his cardinal aim had been to hold the German armies off from Russia for as long as might be” (Paraphrased from Churchill’s December 1944 remarks in the House of Commons.)

“It would be unwise to assume Stalin approves of Hitler’s aggression. Probably the Soviet Government has merely sought a delaying tactic, not wanting to be the next victim. They will have a rude awakening, but they think, at least for now, they can keep the wolf from the door” Franklin D. Roosevelt (President of the United States, 1933–1945), from Harold L. Ickes’s diary entries, early September 1939. Ickes’s diaries are published as The Secret Diary of Harold Ickes.

"One must suppose that the Soviet Government, seeing no immediate prospect of real support from outside, decided to make its own arrangements for self‑defence, however unpalatable such an agreement might appear. We in this House cannot be astonished that a government acting solely on grounds of power politics should take that course” Neville Chamberlain House of Commons Statement, August 24, 1939 (one day after pact’s signing)

Again, thank you for reading so far. I’ll be glad to engage in constructive criticism.

Russia can barely win a war against the poorest country in Europe, it has no interest or capabilities of invading Western Europe in my opinion. Regardless of that, I can’t remember one single time in which European nations have armed themselves and used their armies for a good cause. World War 1, World War 2, colonialism in Africa, South and Central America and Asia come to mind, as well as the bombing of Libya and Yugoslavia, collaboration in Afghanistan or Iraq… Surely, this one time is the right one?

Entiendo muy bien tu posición, y hasta cierto punto la comparto. Si te gustan las estructuras horizontales, me leí un libro que se llama “People’s Republic of Walmart” hablando de las posibilidades de una economía planificada pero descentralizada y horizontal, me parece un concepto tremendo de cara al futuro, y siendo de América Latina seguro que también te interesa el proyecto Cybersyn de planificación computerizada de la economía que intentó llevar a cabo Allende antes de que le asesinasen los Estados Unidos y Pinochet. Mi problema principal con las regulaciones, impuestos a la riqueza y la distribución equitativa es que no he visto ejemplos históricos de países en los que se haya podido llevar eso a cabo sin que te den un golpe de estado fascista, por ejemplo una vez más el Chile de Allende.

Yup, pretty spot-on. Thank you for translation

The country with a communist party and 60% of state ownership of the stock market is less socialist than the Nordic countries currently electing fascists into government like Finland and increasing poverty rates by 2% of their total population in 3 years?

This applies especially well to Europe. Everyone cheering at military expenditure, let’s see how happy we are when the tanks manufactured during the socdems are in the hands of the European nazis…

As a European, I wish it were only Israel and Russian governments… AfD is polling highest in Germany, Finland elected a far-right government as did Italy, France is well on the way to do that, and possibly so is Spain. At least I’m militant in a communist organization fighting fascism in Spain, proud to have participated and coordinated the anti-genocide mass protests of a week ago, everyone who’s reading this: organize, organize and organize. Join local worker struggles and international worker solidarity with Palestinians, unionize yourself and your coworkers, push for general strike against the genocide in Palestine and for better rights for workers

Por desgracia, hablar en .world sobre el papel que han tenido los Estados Unidos en la propagación y financiación del fascismo en todo el mundo te va a acarrear acusaciones de “tankie”. La mayoría de usuarios de .world son yanquis anticomunistas que van a aprobar toda represión contra los “radicales comunistas”, tachándoles de autoritarios o de pro-Rusos. Como cantaba Carlos Puebla:

“Nada de viejos partidos, colorado y blanco: la nueva esperanza dice Tupamaros, Tupamaros!”

Many people don’t have that luxury.

China famously does not have an incumbent fascist problem, and the west famously chooses to oppose China geopolitically. What the commenter above you said is correct. China is getting better in lgbtq regulation, women’s rights, worker rights, healthcare and education, not worse like Europe. China is opening up its media and social media to the world (tiktok and rednote in the west), while the west closes up to them (censorship of tiktok and Russian media)…

I don’t agree with the trashing of things and vandalism. I don’t even know what that’s supposed to achieve

with the noise that is being made worldwide

You’re very close

Yes, furthering capitalism doesn’t solve the problems of capitalism, it only makes them run deeper. We should socialize companies through a mixture of state ownership and unions.

Socialist countries? You mean like China? Or are you talking about European-style socialdemocracy? Plenty of suburban neighborhoods with detached housing in Germany or Norway too

This has less to do with the admittedly awful automobile-based society and more to do with the allocation of housing. High prices and low availability lead to people generally living randomly far away from their workplace. Soviet Union citizens for example accessed housing mostly through their labor union, and were allocated housing near their workplace so they could easily go walking or with public transit. It made cities very efficient with regards to commute, together with the division of urban areas into so-called “mikroraion” units, which established the concept of 15-minute neighborhoods already 70 years ago.

The post still applies to you in its entirety except for the 1h unpaid overtime. And yes, socialist ideas are good, that’s the entire point of the post.

The 996 in China is far from standard, it’s prominent mainly in the informatics/electronics sector, and it doesn’t exist in the public sector as it’s technically illegal afaik, just not prosecuted. Also, there’s increasing pushback in China against it, and it’s diminishing in scope.

So we’ll have to wait for next elections until Brits elect a fascist in response to Kid Starver being actively harmful to everyone in the working class… Wonderful