this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2023
1163 points (94.2% liked)

Memes

45730 readers
1929 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AngelJamie@lemmy.ml 60 points 1 year ago (4 children)

The caveat is that being a "racist mass murderer with a superiority complex" is a very right-wing thing. It wouldn't be possible to fit that mold and be leftist because it's entirely incompatible with leftist ideology.

[–] BaumGeist@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 year ago

I don't understand why someone would bring up that being right-wing does not make one a nazi unless they were right-wing and felt like the type of person who is at risk of being called a nazi.

That being said, in reference to your commenr: in America it is as you say. Elsewhere in the world it's a bit more complicated. Left and Right originally referred to the sides of the French National Assembly, who either supported the king or the revolution. In some uses it just means people who support liberal economics (more funding) or conservative economics (less debt).

Most people would agree that communism is a left-wing ideology, but there have been famous communist leaders that were racist, mass-murdering and/or with superiority complexes (the famous examples of Che Guevara, Mao, Stalin and Pol Pot all fit some of those criteria each).

[–] Iam_Cat@feddit.de 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Did you just seriously say that there has never been a left wing racist mass murderer with a superiority complex?

[–] OrnluWolfjarl@lemmygrad.ml 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.ml -4 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Certainly been a few waving the flag of socialism/communism that have lead to those consequences.

[–] cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s not uncommon for fascists to adopt socialist rhetoric to try and gain mass appeal. However that falls away under the lightest scrutiny of their actions and ideology. “National Socialism” is the most obvious example. I’d include Pol Pot in that bucket as well.

The USSR under Stalin and PRC under Mao are a bit different. The government in either case made decisions that led to unnecessary death, but there’s no evidence to suggest any of their missteps were motivated by racial animus.

[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 year ago

Mao's Great Leap Forward was him trying to push Communist ideology onto nature. He had one hammer in his tool box and tried using it on everything.

[–] OrnluWolfjarl@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Duamerthrax@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Pol Pot should be a uncontroversial pick.

[–] OrnluWolfjarl@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Sure, but then so is Hitler by that standard. They just used leftist iconography on the surface for propaganda purposes, and did not commit their crimes in the name of any sort of left-wing ideology. Pol Pot in particular was supported by the US military and intelligence mechanisms (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegations_of_United_States_support_for_the_Khmer_Rouge), and is fair to assume that his movement was used as a psy-op to hurt the communist cause in Cambodia and Vietnam.

[–] bloodfart@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago

Another cool pol pot fact: mao took him at face value and said “hey, it’s cool that you’re down but you’re kinda fuckin up, wanna read some of these books and get your shit right?” And pol pot was all “no, I’m fine.”