this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2024
315 points (95.4% liked)

memes

23336 readers
257 users here now

dank memes

Rules:

  1. All posts must be memes and follow a general meme setup.

  2. No unedited webcomics.

  3. Someone saying something funny or cringe on twitter/tumblr/reddit/etc. is not a meme. Post that stuff in /c/slop

  4. Va*sh posting is haram and will be removed.

  5. Follow the code of conduct.

  6. Tag OC at the end of your title and we'll probably pin it for a while if we see it.

  7. Recent reposts might be removed.

  8. Tagging OC with the hexbear watermark is praxis.

  9. No anti-natalism memes. See: Eco-fascism Primer

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
315
Direct action (hexbear.net)
submitted 7 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
183 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 18 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Why would I read and refute something you can't even be arsed to read? You've already got two responses, which is two more than what you deserve for "citing" (very heavy air quotes) the first book with a somewhat usable title, the contents of which you still don't know, nor do you know anything about the validity of the work or its authors.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

And meanwhile you gave me a source from before the bulk of Stalins leadership to educate me. If you had taken the time to actually read it yourself you would have noted its irrelevance to this conversation as well as the overall topic.

[–] [email protected] 15 points 7 months ago (1 children)

What are you talking about?
I haven't made any claims towards a specific period, you asked for reading material and I presented some to you. Of this I gave you material that was an indepth detailing of the soviet gulag system up to world war 2, and several other pieces of reading material. You asked what you were supposed to read and I gave you some pointers, does your elevator not go all the way to the top or?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

The Soviet World by Anna Louise?

[–] [email protected] 13 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Yes that is one of several texts I presented to you, good job. Seems like you didn't read the rest of what I wrote.

I haven't made any claims towards a specific period, you asked for reading material and I presented some to you. Of this I gave you material that was an indepth detailing of the soviet gulag system up to world war 2, and several other pieces of reading material. You asked what you were supposed to read and I gave you some pointers, does your elevator not go all the way to the top or?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The difference between you and me is I actually took a look at your sources. And like I said that one was not at all relevant or helpful given its age. A lot happened since 1936.

Also, I took a look at Blackshirts and Reds while we've been going back and forth. Chapter 5 actually supports the numbers I've read I'm wikipedia, so thanks for reaffirming it's reliability.

Honestly, what are you even trying to argue with me about? I don't even get the point of all the conversations we've been having in this thread.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

The difference between you and me is I actually took a look at your sources.

The difference between you and me is that I actually look at my own sources.

And like I said that one was not at all relevant or helpful given its age. A lot happened since 1936.

Like I said it is relevant as it describes the soviet gulag system. You also haven't looked at it apart from briefly skimming the year. Double also - You asked what you should be reading and I provided you texts, you're now trying to worm your way into some weird argument about the sources not being "relevant" despite us not having any discussion to relate to. There's nothing to debunk or discuss since all you've done is postulate that [insert common unsourced red scare propaganda] and that you have that from wikipedia. Which I dismissed, which made you ask what you should be reading instead, which led me to making a bit of an effort in giving you some good places to start, which has now led to more dishonesty from you. Not knowing something is okay, you do not have to be so defensive.
This is also just weird, considering that another source I linked you was this brief breakdown of a few reports. This one should be right up your alley - It's written without academic rigour by anonymous and biased users using no first hand sources, cherrypicking quotes to serve their own agenda. Just like your lovely wikipedia!

Also, I took a look at Blackshirts and Reds while we've been going back and forth. Chapter 5 actually supports the numbers I've read I'm wikipedia, so thanks for reaffirming it's reliability. Honestly, what are you even trying to argue with me about? I don't even get the point of all the conversations we've been having in this thread.

My god. Wisdom is chasing you, but you're too fast.