Gotta counter the Lemmygrad propaganda going on here lately.
this post was submitted on 07 Jan 2026
69 points (94.8% liked)
Slop.
772 readers
524 users here now
For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
the Korean one is really funny. assassinating an anarchist leader to make their movement fall apart would be considered too on the nose in a work of fiction. i know the russian and spanish civil war ones are conveniently leaving out a lot of details that make the soviet actions a lot more reasonable.
Worth noting that the DPRK upholds Kim Chwa-Chin, as does the ROK, as a vital independence figure.
yeah, i hadn't ever heard of that one either. a brief look at wikipedia puts it in 1929-31, so before china was actually communist and immediately preceding the imperial occupation of china by japan, who was also at least partially responsible for it's short existence. that's a period i need to study up on as well, but it'll be a while before i can prioritize reading a book about it.
The KPAM existed in the context of Japanese colonization, many Koreans were members of the CPC and fighting alongside them against the Japanese. Japanese colonization of Korea was from 1910 to 1945, which puts the KPAM in the middle of that, and right before full colonization of Manchuria by Japan. Really messy period.
Yeah, wasn't Makhno a huge piece of shit?
can't really comment on his personality, but he was far from a consistent ally of the bolsheviks. given the precarity of the soviet state in the early days, their decision to deal harshly with rebellions from former allies is very understandable.
Makhno was actually relatively good. There were plenty of much shittier anarchist and anarchist-adjacent leaders, whom no one likes to remember.
IIRC wasn't one of the big problems with Makhno the inconsistent control over the territory and discipline among armed forces leading to various element committing pogroms on their own initiative?
This was absolutely everyone's problem during the Civil War. Makhno, at least, made a serious effort to combat it, like Bolsheviks.
Edit: except the Whites, who I don't think viewed it as a problem.
Some White generals also viewed it as a problem, not because they cared about Jews, but because their troops were pillaging instead of following orders, and all the loot made them not very mobile. They didn't do anything about it in the end.
I was thinking the same, but I guess being a shit anarchist (or an impression of one) doesn't stop you from being a great man proponent