Tankie talking point currently top of r/PublicFreakout
By - podcast_critic
why is public freakout infested by commies?
Young people being against everything their parents support is probably a decent part of the equation. Would also explain the “Israel has no right to exist” and “ACAB” attitudes that tend to exist over there
Lmao whenever I see people saying those israel comments I'm just like "aight. What's your plan for this situation then?"
Most commies I've met have been pretty anti-Semitic. Not surprising as a lot of their idols were as well.
So it's probably just to "get rid of them".
I've also noticed on Reddit when the discussion of Israel arises it often devolves into a bunch of Jewish hate mixed with "well of course I don't mean *all* Jews! I'm just saying Jew but I really mean Israeli!" type excuses. Not that even that excuses it in any way no matter how you feel on the situation.
[This is what Soviet propaganda was like.](https://twitter.com/sumlenny/status/1393973838350798851)
Basically, commies will defend their blatant antisemitic sentiments about Israel with "not racist, just don't like them" mentality.
To be a true communist, nothing can come between the individual and the state. Alternative sources of meaning and identity — such as religion or a particular bond of culture — are threats to the power of the state.
Jews, who have by necessity developed particularly tight bonds with one another throughout the diaspora, are a thorn in the side of communists. There is an irony here, in that Jews have been traditionally more supportive of socialism, probably because they’ve spent so much time in Europe living in self-contained communities that relied on a certain “all for one, one for all” attitude which works well in socialism.
Of course, that might be putting too fancy a theory on it. A lot of people in Europe hated Jews for all the usual antisemitic garbage reasons, and that didn’t change when they replaced a double eagle lapel pin for a red star.
The answer I have gotten about what would happen to the Jews after the elimination of Israel is that the Jews will be protected by "international peacekeepers".
It is one of the most annoying things bad faith arguers use - pretending to be an idiot genuinely believing 0.00000001% likely future outcomes as likely.
My most charitable interpretation of that argument is that the people making it are simply ignorant of history. My least charitable interpretation is that it's a veiled threat of ethnic cleansing with "international peacekeepers" being a deliberate reference to the UN peacekeepers in Rwanda and Yugoslavia.
My strong suspicion is a great deal of them would move to the US, Canada or Australia. Basically any developed Western state that does not have a long history of social and/or cultural anti-Semitism. You would have the hardcore "Guns and Moses" types who will hunker down and the poor bastards without the means to flee, but i suspect it would be a replay of the Jewish Revolts then Disapora at 4x speed in general.
Also a new Jewish genocide commited by ✨Hamas✨
Israel is not the only state which tankies want to eliminate. They hate Ukraine too.
This sounds a lot like the answers you get from communists when you ask about any complication or logical conclusion of the ideology. It's either "X doesn't happen under communism" or some overly simplistic explanation where there are conveniently none of the complications that exist in real life.
Lol and all "successful" communists states were all in war torn areas where some commies took power of a small region for no more than two years. The countries that did communism the "right way" were always like that.
Like I don't know if they don't understand that it only didn't end up like Soviet Union & crew was bc they were reconquered before the system had time to collapse.
I look at it this way. One side is not great because they are seizing and occupying territory to which their claim is suspect and they're also moderately racist towards Arabs and Muslims. When they launch missiles and air strikes they announce it first. The other side wants to eradicate the Jewish people and has openly stated so for the past 2000 years. They launch rockets indiscriminately at civilians, commit suicide attacks, and use women and children as shields... it really should not be complicated to say "the Jews aint perfect but they're better than their enemy."
Pfft just make the jews live in diaspora again duh. /s
I ask this of everyone who bashes the US: why are you here then?
Bashing capitalism: what’s your suggestion?
I mean you can disagree with a situation without knowing how to solve it
Criticizing apartheid doesn't require providing an alternative
First of all, this is first “apartheid” I’m aware of where all citizens have equal rights in the country. Second of all, all criticisms absolutely do require an alternative.
What bizzaro world are you in where the Palestinians have equal rights? Up is down, left is right. 2+2=5 you've got alternative facts is that all?
Palestinians aren't Israeli citizens. Israeli Arabs are, however. In the same way a Canadian isn't an American citizen.
oh. considering my mom no wonder i ended up supporting what can only be described as neo reaganism
so you lick more boots than commies do?
Day 1: ACAB!
Day 15: “help I’m being assaulted / raped !”
Bystander: “pay me and I’ll save you”
Day 200: “why are you stealing from me! I said ACAB!”
Thief: “because I can”
It’s almost like all the liberal schools failed to teach history or the development of modern society, instead we get word soup “Critical Theorists”
I don’t support Israel and ACAB is based... but Im an anti communist lol
You are a rare breed. While I do disagree with your view on Israel and your ACAB stance, the mere fact you are anti communism means I will stand along side you. You need to be protected.
Ok thin blue line
Thank you for that amazing rebuttal.
Right wing destroyed.
It kinda sucks right now cuz one Public Freakout sub is far left and the other is far right. Neither are grounded.
it's just like the internet in general sadly. it sucks cuz on one hand i'm black, but i hate socialism so both sides hate me
Non-leftists do NOT hate you.
i know centrist probably just disagree with me. but there are too many terminally online extremists to have a reasonable discussion
What? I know many right wing people and none of them hate black people, for real. In fact, leftists are probably the ones who actually hate you or think you are dumb.
There are multiple studies like [this](https://www.inquirer.com/columnists/yale-study-white-liberals-black-conversation-solomon-jones-20181204.html) which show that leftists talk to you like you are stupid while right wing people treat you just like anyone else.
i told you, normal righties are fine, i'm one of them, but the problem are neo nazis and other extremists
Well, neo-nazis first of all are extremely few (at least these days) and anyone who openly advocates such positions gets immediately shunned from all mainstream right-wing parties.
But if you are left-wing and you say you support Stalin, deny the Ughyur genocide and such nobody bats an eye and the party still supports you.
That's the difference.
Yeah man, too many people unwilling to exchange ideas. Just a constant stream of buzzword slurs.
That’s how we better ourselves, learn about the other’s pov and how to work out issues that affect us all. Atleast there are some people still willing to civilly disagree and discuss their views.
I think actual public freakouts is more grounded than you might think. theres a ton of people over there trying to be edgy that might make it seem far right but every time I see someone bring up a well reasoned left leaning view point it gets upvoted.
There are a lot of just normal people there but every once in a while you will see some shit and it seems like the mods don’t do too much to stop it
How is actualpublicfreakouts far right? It just isn't far left.
I would say its probably center. leaning right. but there has been plenty times that I've seen typical left wing view points be updooted there. like, I haven't seen much sexism, or homophobia there. definitely some implied racism there though that doesn't get the downvotes you would hope it would.
There are some racist edgelords in there if you look at removed comments or controversial, especially during the blm time period last year, but they were usually downvoted (not always but usually) and sometimes they got banned too
which is certainly evidence for the types of people who have been attracted to the subreddit. no doubt. but how thier dealt with is evidence of the beliefs of the majority of the people in the sub and the mods
ah, yeah, the lowest form of life on earth
well I mean... you dont need to be a commie to acknowledge history right? the germans suffered FAR more casualties and losses on their eastern front than they did on their western one. Thats a simple fact. doesnt make one a communist to recognize the part commies played in winning that war.
That this was front page surprised me....but then again, Reddit is pretty awful these days so I did what I always do and looked for the good comments in "controversial".
EVEN THE CONTROVERSIAL COMMENTS WERE POSTIVE!! My word! The one or two people who point out that this is just bullshit were downvoted to hell. What's going on with public freakout?
The same thing going on everywhere on Reddit
Communist kiddos took over
The great Tumblr exodus was the most damning event for this website. Tumblr used to house all of the leftist coomers & edgy children and they’d mostly stay to their own echo chamber, but ever since the porn ban all of these degenerates have infested twitter and reddit.
Yeah. They ended the holocaust and started their own.
As much as I hate communists, 9/10 Germans died on the eastern front. It’s never paid enough attention in western spheres. That said, the atrocities of the soviets are on the same magnitude as the holocaust.
Not to mention the Soviet’s were perfectly happy to secretly cut treaties with the nazis to cut up Poland five minutes before they wound up fighting them.
It wasn’t just Poland, they divided up Eastern Europe between themselves
It's the "Soviets ended the Holocaust" that gets me. Yes the allies were made up entirely of Soviets and nobody else. The Western front was basically a waste of time.
Wasn’t a waste of time. We stopped the commies from taking the entirety of Europe. There was significant fear the red army would do this anyway and just continue the war against the rest of the allies. They almost certainly would have if we weren’t there to stop them.
Are there any documents to back this up?
Sneeding hard rn
The Germans had to devote millions of men to defend against the eventual Western Allied offensive, and guard against air attack which took hundreds of thousands of gun barrels off the Eastern Front.
[Link to an old post that offers an explanation counter to this 9/10 oversimplification.](https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/57ibnm/til_that_27_million_soviet_citizens_died_in_wwii/d8siv9j/)
That’s an interesting post, thanks. Had no idea the magnitude of captured troops. I would still argue that the eastern front has largely been ignored by the west.
“Soviets killed more Germans” ≠ “Soviets ended the Holocaust”
The Soviets (including their gulags) were supported by US arms and equipment, without which they would have collapsed
100 percent correct. What’s that trope? Russian men, American steel, and British intelligence.
I do agree with your assertion that the Eastern Front is largely ignored in the West, and I want to add on that I think it's also underestimated with just how much the US helped the Russians. This site I discovered shows the amount of stuff that was sent out through Lend Lease, and the amount of stuff the US gave to the Allies is incredible. For the Russians, a few notable ones are 14 million shoes, 434,000 Jeeps (out of 793,000 sent to all countries in Lend Lease), 105,000 Studebaker trucks, and plenty of others.
(*cough*) Operation Market Garden. Monty knew the Germans had a great deal of armor in the target zone but launched an airborne assault anyway. (*cough*) The Wehrmacht had alot of flaws but slow reaction times and inability to improvise weren't ones. You'd think five years of war would have made that clear. (*cough*)
The bridge too far was that xxxth corp couldn't relieve the British paratroopers in the Arnhem. The reason for that was the rapidity of the German counters stregnthed by their armor, grossly simplified.
Whiles montys name was on the operation. He didn’t coordinate it. Some other guy did I forget who. But Monty got blamed for the fumbles of someone else.
The buck still stopped on Monty's desk and considering how controversial the operation was Monty could not have been ignorant of the issues.
Same. As much as I think the ussr was horrible, there's no denying that the soviets were the primary force that took down the nazis in ww2, at least in terms of just military force. The country genuinely did sacrifice a lot during the war. The chances of a male born in the ussr in 1923 living to see his 23rd birthday was 1 in 5.
The USSR was just one part of the war effort. The USSR would not have won without US manufacturing bolstering their losses.
The second front being opened helped too.
Agreed, that's why I said pure military force, as opposed to intelligence or manufacturing.
That's true, but that's not what the guy is actually saying if you listen carefully. He's making a slightly different argument.
You talking about the last part where he says soviet atrocities were as bad as the holocaust? I wasn't referring to that part, should've made that clear. Imo soviet atrocities weren't as bad, but certainly bad enough to where they are morally indefensible.
I don’t think it necessarily follows that since the USSR lost the most that means they were the primary force. Lend leases, mostly British tanks in 1941, and American jeeps (extremely important), oil, rubber and steel played a ginormous part in the USSRs changing of the tides on the eastern front. The real answer is that all 3 countries were needed to take down Germany, and all should be proud that they did so.
That' why I said specifically in terms of military force. Ofc the manufacturing, intelligence, etc. from the other powers were necessary, but if you're talking about the people who pushed forward, into the heart of Germany, sacrificing many of their soldiers along the way? The soviets.
There's no denying what Ivan paid but the price need not be that high. Stalin under wrote the Wehrmacht from 1939 to 1941. Great Britain, France, Belgium, Holland, Luxembourg, Norway, and Poland (especially Poland) are right to sneer at Russia.
That's true, and I don't think stalins treatment of human life as so expendable was either right, or even necessary to win the war, but that was how it ended up being won.
That's how it ended being won with so much casualties. Stalin killed all high-ranking combat generals with military experience several years before the war.
It’s actually 8/10 and the US material support for the Soviet armed forces prevented their capitulation.
Yeah exactly. Ryan Grim is nowhere near a tankie. But he does recognize their contribution to fighting fascism. That doesn't mean he ignores their awful crimes...just credit where it's due. The Soviet's did sacrifice a ton of people.
Don’t tell them how the Soviets rebuild Germany’s military in-between the wars starting with the treaty of Rapallo, followed by the treaty of Berlin, and the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. Also, don’t tell them about the Soviet -Axis talks of 1940. It’s funny how they think this historically illiterate nonsense “owned” someone.
I can’t believe people don’t just say “The Allies ended the Holocaust”. We all killed the Nazis, we all liberated every camp we saw, the Soviets simply were near more of the camps.
The Soviets weren’t just “closer to the camps,” though. 76% of Nazi losses were to the USSR.
Deaths not losses.
Units taken prisoner are lost to the war effort too same as units denied their war supplies.
[Good explanation about that here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/57ibnm/til_that_27_million_soviet_citizens_died_in_wwii/d8siv9j/)
That’s a fair point. But it’s worth noting that towards the end of the war, German soldiers would purposely fight their way to the west so that they could surrender to the western Allies rather than the Soviets, because the Soviets would put the German soldiers into gulags or shoot them (as the Germans did to the Soviet prisoners).
>because the Soviets would put the German soldiers into gulags or shoot them
The Soviets did the same to their own people and the lands they occupied, so there's really no surprise there.
So? Doesn’t mean they ended the Holocaust, also that’s mainly because that’s where most of their troops were. The Western Allies had a much more favorable kill ratio, and provided most everything needed for the Soviets to fight.
They ended the Holocaust by defeating the Nazis.
Wait… did the Americans and the British also not beat the allies?!
They did but the Eastern front was basically a whole order of magnitude bigger and more brutal than the western front. The main contribution by the western allies between 1941 and 1943 was supplying the Soviets with massive amounts of equipment and bombing the German cities.
Well gee I’d say those are some pretty massive roles in the war.
But not quite as massive as the Soviets contributions. At least 20 million Soviet civilians and Soldiers died in the war.
Right… but the Americans and British were sending them the MEANS to fight the war. Yes, far less Americans and British soldiers died during the war but the material contributions cannot be overstated here.
I never meant to understate them. But the sheer sacrifices made by the USSR against the Nazis was immensely important to the war effort.
As did the rest of the Allies
Except the Soviets did the lions share of the work in terms of casualties and Germans killed. Yes, the Alliessupplied vital equipment and fought on multiple fronts, but ultimately the Soviets took the heaviest losses and the war could not have been won without them.
And the Western Allies fought practically the entire air war, much of the ground war, effectively the entire naval war, and supplied the Soviets with items ESSENTIAL to their victory (read: without the US the Soviets would’ve lost). The Allies won, not just the Soviets
The Soviet Air Force played a major role in the war, it just didn’t perform the massive bombing raids. The ground war was primarily carried by the Soviets, and as stated above, 76% of German casualties were in the East.
The equipment was vital and if the US didn’t get involved, the war would have been lost. Without all of the major nations getting involved, the Nazis would have won.However, the Soviets did far more to bring down the Nazis than the rest of the Allies.
4 times the planes died on the Western Front than the Eastern Front for the Germans, the Soviets did less there than the Western Allies did in the land war. The Americans made sure the Soviets could not only have explosives and trucks and extra weapons, they also fed them. The Soviet success was absolutely hinged on American aid, of course the same for the Americans with the Soviets but I’d argue that it’s more so with the Soviets. The Americans and British could MAYBE beat the Germans without the Soviets, the Soviets couldn’t beat Germany without the British and Americans. I personally think it’s about 40/40/20 in terms of credit for the major allies, with the British getting the 20.
I doubt the allies could have won the war without the Soviets. The war would have most likely ended in a ceasefire. Without the German army constantly fighting in the East, the D-Day and Sicily landings would have been easily contained by the entire German army. And without the Western Allies, the Germans wouldn’t have a lot of their reserves tied down in the west preparing for a D-day invasion, as well as the Soviets not receiving the equipment.
I would say it’s split 50/20/20/10, with Soviets getting 50%, US and Britain getting 20% each, and the Canadian and French forces getting 5% each.
Appealing to numbers of casualties is an intentionally imbalanced way to frame the level of contribution by leveraging the stark contrast between German casualties and Germans captured in the two fronts. Casualties do not include captured soldiers. The western front had millions more captured, the Eastern front had millions more deaths. On the whole, the eastern front lasted longer and had more manpower within, but conversations are less productive when the rhetoric is tilted by such distinctive omissions.
Thats mainly because German soldiers wanted to surrender to the Allies, rather than the soviets. Much of the German war effort in the later stages of war was focused on keeping the Soviets back and giving the Allies more time, because even back then "better dead than red" was a common saying.
Besides what the other commenters wrote, you have to remember the Soviets were being actively invaded by the Nazis, which obviously explains a lot. The latter never had the privilege of invading the United States, so obviously the Soviets were forced into extremely heavy fighting.
Secondly, the Soviets didn't enjoy taking POWs and enjoyed a shit ton of war crimes themselves, as the war was drawing to a close.
If it wasn't for the Molotov Ribbentrop Pact, WW2 and the Holocaust would most likely have never even happened in the first place, but ok.
Nah, why TF does everyone forgets that America could had join the war in 1940 the isntant Germany declares war on France.War was inevitable. If America joined war in 1940 they could had prevented German deaths, Holocaust deaths , and Soviet Deaths.
Well to be fair, the US had no obligation to join a war it had nothing to do with. The Soviets on the other hand actively started the war by allying with Hitler and invading multiple sovereign nations in Eastern Europe. It's a bit rich to say the US should have joined the war sooner to save Soviet lives - they were an aggressor.
Then why did US joined Korean war even though they had nothing to do with it? Soviet Union in 1938 wanted to create a pact with Britain and France to send 1 million troops.
Nah, the Nazis were gunning for the soviets from the beginning and the holocaust was in the making long before the pact.
Yes but Nazi Germany could never have invaded the USSR (or any other European country) in the first place were it not for the Molotov Ribbentrop Pact.
Also, the Holocaust didn't start until 1941.
The holocaust didn't start in full until '41 but concentration camps were already constructed (Dachau was built in '33) and antisemitic and racist laws had been in place for years prior. I'm using Holocaust to refer to the Holocaust Era, which encompasses all of the Nazis' genocidal activities.
I also fail to see how the lack of a pact would have stopped Hitler from invading other countries. Lebensraum and the defeat of 'judeo-bolshevism' were core tenets of Nazi ideology, both of which required war. If there's something I'm missing please let me know.
Regarding your latter point, no one is disputing that the Nazis had an aggressive, expansionist ideology. The practical reality though was that they simply couldn't start a war if there was any risk of fighting on two fronts.
If there was any risk that an invasion of Poland would provoke a Soviet response, even Hitler was sensible enough to know it was off the cards.
By allying with the Soviets and agreeing to carve up Eastern Europe, the Nazis had a very clear and achievable path to victory.
Fortunately the Commonwealth stood firm in the dark days when neither the Soviets nor the US were fighting the Germans. Fuck the USSR, they don't get the credit for winning a war that they helped start.
Well, the Holocaust started way before that
The mass killing started in 1941
But let's not pretend apartheid regimes aren't also a form of genocide
Actually they could have. But then they wouldn't have attacked USSR since the element of surprise would have been gone.
Quite frankly it would have been worse. By accident, not something the USSR intended, they actually believed Germany would leave them alone.
The USSR invasion could've been postponed, but it was inevitable. The Nazis believed that massive amount of land was theirs for the taking.
Yet not having two fronts on the same time would have change the game.
Hitler would have never attacked if he thought USSR invasion wouldn't go quick and be a surprise (a prepared USSR would have been completely different from the start) or if he thought the US would intervene.
He didn't want two active big fronts and if for good reason as we now know.
Yes, but he would’ve conquered the UK and then immediately turned his attention East lol. Instead he lost on both fronts.
He would never have conquered the UK. The Royal navy would have simply trapped any invasion force from behind.
I strongly disagree. The Nazis were extremely close to achieving air superiority, if they had focused all of their efforts West, the UK would’ve been crushed, are you kidding me? You haven’t the slightest clue how much man and machine they lost on the Eastern front, it’s obvious. The English Channel would’ve barely been a defense, especially early on when Germany’s battleships and battlecruisers were wrecking havoc. Don’t get funny with me lmfao.
Unless the Germans were going to make transport ships fly, they'd have to contend with the RN, and it's overwhelming numerical and qualitative advantage. They WERE focusing all their efforts west, holy shit look at a timeline you wehrb.
That's if the glorified river barges they were going to use didn't capsize on their own.
It's worth pointing out that the Molotov Ribbentrop Pact was controversial with what was left of the original Bolsheviks.
Trotsky criticised it as short sighted and correctly predicted that the Nazis would break it and attack the USSR.
It really was Stalin's mistake personally.
The soviet union fueled nazi Germany's war machine until 1941,what are you on about.
Ah, yes. The Soviets. The good guys... From my comment on there...
"The man knows more, but both of them seem to have a poor idea of the situation as a whole. The man easily forgetting Russia and Poland has a stark history - like Russia were the goodies.
And yes, the US (...and even Israel) teamed up with prominent Nazis. Is it because the US was overreacting toward the Soviets? Were the soviets hands crystal clean?
Edit: Its also not a lie that the Soviet Union and the US ended the holocaust. Anything that went against the Nazis ended the holocaust."
Quick nobody Google anti-zionism is the USSR
I haven't seen a post that pissed me off that much in a while. History literally being twisted for an entire generation before our eyes, and Reddit is fueling it.
This particular lie is so funny because the USSR has never admitted the Holocaust was specifically aimed at Jews, they call the victims from their nation "peaceful Soviet citizens" lmao. And that's besides the fact that the local people helped the Nazis with their plan. There's a reason why Eastern European Jews had a significantly lower survival rate than their western counterparts.
I'm so glad there's at least one place talking about how absolutely fucking trash Reddit has become.
Holocaust was ended by the ALLIES.
“Rising” who’s ever heard of this shit?
Last I checked Americans and brits found concentration camps invading Germany from the west
Soviet: "yeah the holocaust is over"
Meanwhile there was gulags all around russia, and the holodomor that killed almost the double as the holocaust.
That sub should low key be banned since so much stuff there is simply not a public freak out but just a political conversation, so unless they enforce the sub name rule more then yeah they should be banned
We helped end an atrocity, so that gives us a free pass for all the atrocities we committed!
But that's not what the guy said
Ill bite this thinly veiled commie defense.
All the death camps were in Poland, a country the USSR conquered and occupied after massacring a bunch of their civilians. The US liberated non-death camps too and held more German POWs than the USSR. So yes it's technically true, and feels better if you ignore everything else going on like the liberation of France, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands and more than half of Germany.
The only reason the atrocities committed by the USSR weren’t brought to war crime trials and treated with the scorn we treat Nazism with is they won. So congrats you stopped the Holocaust then started one of your own.
Last I checked the Reds literally made concentration camps in Germany after the war. Saying they ended the Holocaust is just ignorance.
Soviets did end the Holocaust though. The war with the Soviets is what ultimately ended Nazi Germany and the Holocaust with it
No, WW2 is what ultimately ended Nazi Germany. It wasn't just the Soviets. It wasn't just the Soviets even on the eastern front. A lot of men joined them from Eastern europe and died fighting.
But.. soviets did liberate the concentration camps. And capture Berlin.
Well the Americans and British liberated camps and captured major cities too. The Soviets used Americans trains and vehicles. They used British intelligence. That’s why they’re called the ALLIED powers.
They liberated some of the concentration camps. The soviets did capture Berlin but they only took like half of germany itself
The Russians committed a lot of atrocities, including in WWII and as much as I hate them for it, they were the ones who led the charge which caused the fall of Berlin, wider Germany, and ended the holocaust.
The point being made isn't about WW2 though, it is how the US post-war helped nazis get out of Europe and contracted them in various no bueno ways. Which is a fair point.
If you want to break the commies, help the socdems. Unfortunately that point was missed by the US and ensured a bunch of people were pushed into the arms of commies during the cold war
The ussr also used former nazis though. I'm not trying to use whataboutism, I think both sides are bad for doing this but it is just hypocritical to criticize the us but not the soviets.
Not in any combat capacity, and the various agents they sent out to fund/support communist insurgencies in the third world were not former nazis
We aren't talking Werner von Braun here.
The Stasi which [was made up of former nazis](https://www.dw.com/en/book-claims-stasi-employed-nazis-as-spies/a-1760980) literally trained [anti semitic terrorists to kill Jews](https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1990/10/14/east-germanys-dirty-secret/09375b6f-2ae1-4173-a0dc-77a9c276aa4b/) and had their own fair share of [aiding terrible dictators](https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ethiopia-still-haunted-by-memory-of-derg-genocidal-regime-1.563626?mode=amp) (actually one of the worst considering the Derg orchestrated one of the largest African famines in the 20th century)
1. Tankie talking point currently top ... - [archive.org](https://web.archive.org/20210612211651/https://i.redd.it/gvs9znx9iw471.jpg), [_archive.today\*_](https://archive.today/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fi.redd.it%2Fgvs9znx9iw471.jpg&run=1 "could not auto-archive; click to resubmit it!")
*I am just a simple bot, **not** a moderator of this subreddit* | [*bot subreddit*](/r/SnapshillBot) | [*contact the maintainers*](/message/compose?to=\/r\/SnapshillBot)
Where’s the link? I need to see this commie getting schooled
I dont have a link but the post got really popular and the comments supported them
Also I think that brigading is not allowed here
Communism is when you teach history to idiotic westerners
It's not a tankie talking point, it's objective fact lol