Is it simply over-correcting in response to western anti-communist propaganda? I’d like to think it’s simply memeing for memes sake, but it feels too genuine.

  • freagle@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 months ago

    Stalin is indefensible. As are any of the other examples given

    I mean, this is clearly patently false. People defend all of these leaders literally all the time. The OP is asking how it’s possible that people could like Stalin. I’m providing what is likely the single largest contributor to his political cache among the people who support him.

    You can say Churchill is indefensible until you’re blue in the face, but people will still defend him. Same for Reagan, same for Truman. Just because you believe something doesn’t mean other people believe it. Anarchists have no problem with understanding this concept when it comes to affinity groups, but y’all draw the line at people assigning moral valence to specific leadership actions? Y’all are weird.