Just bring up the Roma and see how fast this little euro shit starts not only denying genocide but actively promoting it
PSA: for amerikkkans to bully europoors more effectively online, know your target. Western europeans rarely hate Romani, if they’ve even heard the term — eastern Europeans hate :romani:. The western Europeans hate Muslims. :eu-cool:
(And the serbs hate the croats hate the bosnians who hate the serbs who hate the bosnians who hate the moldovians… But they all hate the westerners)
i’m good, that sounds a lot like peeing in the ocean
https://jewishcurrents.org/the-double-genocide-theory
Mainstream, well-regarded historians typically also do not view the Soviet Famine of the '30s as a genocide, including such people as J. Arch Getty, and even Robert Conquest later on (he initially characterized it as genocide but walked it back later).
Thank you!
I remembered reading the Jewish Currents article when I was replying but forgot the publication and link
Wild to see Zionists pushing also pushing back on the Holodomor
I actually know a family that cluelessly housed Azov fighters as refugees (went back to fight lmao) and will be using the Jewish Currents article to help stop the self-identified socialist kids (large adult sons) from buying into literal Nazi propaganda.
The lack of evidence is just evidence of how totalitarian the Chinese are.
what was that thing Parenti said
"During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence.
If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative.
If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom.
A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them.
If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained.
What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum."
-:parenti: