So, three authoritarians, and only two get to survive.
this post was submitted on 30 Jan 2025
788 points (89.7% liked)
Microblog Memes
6328 readers
4290 users here now
A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.
Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.
Rules:
- Please put at least one word relevant to the post in the post title.
- Be nice.
- No advertising, brand promotion or guerilla marketing.
- Posters are encouraged to link to the toot or tweet etc in the description of posts.
Related communities:
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
the lib gives the gun to the fascist the fascist shoots the lib in the back of the head twice, the fasicst then gaslights the marxist into believing the lib committed self harm
load more comments
(1 replies)
Throw the gun away and beat thw shit out of the fascist with the other two would be my choice. That hurts more than a gunshot.
beat thw shit out of the fascist with the other
You mean ask them for help, or use them as oversized clubs?
If they wanna be oversized clubs im down for that but originally i meant ask fof help
load more comments
(1 replies)
A Marxist is stuck in a room with a liberal, a fascist, and an anarchist. The Marxist has one gun and two bullets. What does the Marxist do? Shoot the liberal and the anarchist.
(Based off actual historical events.)
The Soviet Union did more to stop the fascists than anyone else, and 27 million people in the Soviet Union were killed in the fight.
Yeah, but that's after they made an alliance with Nazi Germany. An alliance Germany broke, not the USSR.
The USSR first sought an alliance with Britain and France which was rejected, so they signed a non-aggression pact with Germany. Britain and France also signed a non-aggression pact with Germany, betraying one of their allies (Czechoslovakia) in exchange.
Should we take the fact that the US and USSR fought on the same side in WWII to say that they were always close friends and ideologically aligned, completely ignoring everything else? Because if anything that would be more reasonable to assert, because it never escalated to a hot war between the two.
It wasn't just a pact of non-aggression. They divided Poland between themselves! France and Britain abandoned Czechoslovakia to avoid a war, USSR made an alliance with Nazi Germany to begin one.
And USSR and the US were on the same side because they were attacked by allied countries (Germany and Japan), they didn't chose one another. Stop your historical revisionism.
I won't defend all of the USSR's actions, but it's absurd to suggest they were motivated by any sort of ideological alignment with the Nazis as opposed to self-interest and circumstance, in the same way that the US and USSR were motivated by a common interest rather than ideological alignment.
At basically every other moment in history, all across the globe, Marxists and fascists have been at each other's throats.
Nothing I've said is in the least bit "historical revisionism."
load more comments
(3 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
A non-aggression pact is not so much of an alliance. Nazis are the ones who broke it anyway. US armed/financed German military-industrial complex.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(8 replies)
If anyone disagrees:
Kronstadt
Spanish Civil War
Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact
The War in Ukraine
Etc.
load more comments
(9 replies)
load more comments
(5 replies)