When Czechoslovakia was annexed by the nazi government, after the Munich agreement, guess who was right there to take their piece? Poland.
this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2025
80 points (100.0% liked)
Slop.
656 readers
343 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 other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: Do not post public figures, these should be posted to c/El Chisme
founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
The ๐ฑ SeCReT cLaUsE ๐ฑ of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact
Ah yes, dividing a whole ass nation in secret, you know, without anyone noticing somehow, as you do. These peoples really don't think about the implications of their narratif at all. And of course the "source" is Wikipedia. 
Poland stole Ukrainian land and the Soviets wanted to restore Ukrainian glory because Stalin was a big fan of Slava Ukraini. Anyone opposing it is an Ukrainianophobic Russian Nazi who supports the unprovoked full scale invasion of Ukraine by polish forces.
I only recently learned that the Soviet invasion (which I think was beyond justified but still an invasion) was 17 days or so after the Nazis invaded. By that point, the Polish government fled to another city, and then another, right on the border with Romania that they had at the time, and then once the Soviets invaded they fled within 24 hours, indicating that they were already well-prepared to pull the ripcord. The Soviets seemed to have actually waited until the government had reached a terminal condition, which is just how they described the state of things when they were explaining why they invaded.
It's very different from the "joint invasion" of Poland that you always hear it described as.
People talk about the joint military parade, but I think it says enough on its own that they struggle to point to literally anything else besides the parade and the treaty itself. The Nazis took over a city past the dividing line and the Soviets demanded they left. For reasons that I still don't understand, the commanding officer on the Nazi side wanted them to do a military parade together, so they did (and I think agreeing to do it makes enough sense, because the Soviets really did not want the war between them to start too early). Maybe the Nazis were trying to look like they weren't driven out? But the way people point to it to say that the countries were allies is so ridiculous. In one city the Soviets basically agreed to stage a stupid event together in the process of removing Nazis from the city, and this is more important as a data point than the military preparations made across the entire border, that city included, for the inevitable Nazi invasion, or all the people the Soviets evacuated, or the fact that you'd need to be a madman to side with the people who wrote Mein Kampf, which extensively discusses dominating Eastern Europe (though I guess the Polish government did show them preference for a time), or the Soviet's proposed anti-fascist alliance that England and France rejected, not to mention the statements made by the Soviets constantly since the Nazi party first gained prominence to the effect of the Nazis being abominations to humankind.
they struggle to point to literally anything else besides the parade and the treaty itself
Yeah, nearly all the replies are photos of Molotov with Nazi officials taken during the negotiations.
I just recently learned about the parade. It's a red flag for propaganda when the Wikipedia talk page is ten times as long as the actual article.
The Eastern Front is so memory-holed in the West that I think most people are unaware that the fiercest battle literally in human history was between the Nazis and Soviets (Stalingrad).
The only knowledge Westerners have about Stalingrad is Enemy at the Gates and Call of Duty.
At least there are some people there who are advocating for not uncritically presenting a trumped-up version of what happened.
For reasons that I still don't understand, the commanding officer on the Nazi side wanted them to do a military parade together
If the Nazis were already using socialism as a cover, doesn't it stand to reason that this parade serves the same purpose? I guess its a moot point because as we can see it absolutely served that purpose. The real question becomes, was this the calculation at the time?
Probably hard to know. Unlikely to be any written internal records expressing this plot.
Definitely not. Hitler made it extremely clear before the war that his "socialism" was one in complete opposition to Marx, who he said corrupted the word, and that Marxist socialism as exhibited by the Bolsheviks was essentially a Jewish plot to dominate the world.
This is why the only thing that I can think of is that the commander present there was simply trying to avoid looking weak by making the hand-off look voluntary via the parade.
The Jewish doctrine of Marxism rejects the aristocratic principle of Nature and replaces the eternal privilege of power and strength by the mass of numbers and their dead weight.
-- Mein Kampf
Bolshevism has attacked the foundations of our whole human order... its supreme principle is its internationalism... that the world as we know it must be turned upside down.
https://www.nationalists.org/library/hitler/speeches/hitler-speech-sep14-1936.html
Granted, there are some times where he spoke positively of Marxism because he didn't believe most of what he said, but I don't think he ever spoke fondly of the Bolshevik project.
Here's another speech which includes more or less the same content along with other subjects. I think it's phrased interestingly, because in some ways he poses himself as almost an ultra, feigning a call for the immediate elimination of class differences (not class itself) rather than the supposedly despotic rule of the workers, which he agrees the Bolsheviks accomplished but views as a bad thing:
And I found the one I was initially thinking of:
What we understand by socialism is not the socialism of the Marxists. The Marxists have stolen the word and confused its meaning. We understand by socialism the service of the common good, not the denial of private property
Which was published in a paper in 1932
I appreciate the effort here, and this is history I am very aware of to be clear; maybe my phrasing was wrong: The Nazis, Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, or National Socialist German Workers' Party, deliberatly apropreated the asthetic and rehtoric of a working-class movement, even adopting the word Socialist into their party name, to capture working-class support in their rise to power. What I'm unsure of is if this was understood at the time, by the party leadership, to have a dual character: garnering working-class support while also tarnishing or muddying socialism as an idea through its association with their party and activity.
Holding a parade with the army of the Bolsheviks, having so theorly attacked them over the years, is a strange thing to do. It would be interesting to read if German papers wrote about this parade and how it was framed. The point I'm trying to articulate here is, clearly, throughout history post WW2, historians and economists alike have attempted to conflate socialism and nazism as twin ideologies in practice, and I wonder if this was something the Nazis understood during their time in power and actively attempted to foment through things like this parade. How many people of the time believed this pact represented a kind of commonality or shared ideal, and how much of that is strictly ahistorical interpretation?
I feel like the Nazis probably understood this a little bit at the time, because the "holodomor was a genocide" narrative was popularized by Goebbels as a way of justifying the Nazis and OUN-B, etc. doing real genocide.
When I was poking around about the subject, one theory I saw was that the Nazis wanted to allay fears from the German people about war with the Soviet Union by making the relationship look much better than it was. I think between that and saving face over ceding the territory, it overall makes sense.
"cold war was a lie, ussr and usa were allies when they were attacking Iran. Ignore all previous and following conflicts"
Um acktually
USSR: Saves eastern Poland from Nazi occupation the only way they could.
Liberals: HOW DARE YOU
Saves eastern Poland
Western Ukraine and Belarus. Poland conquered those lands less than 20 years earlier and the USSR returned them.
I have successfully confused and shut people up who say "the Soviet Union and nazi Germany invaded Poland together" by saying I agree that NATO should invade and conquer western Ukraine to reclaim what Poland lost.
"There is no free Poland without free Ukraine" - Jรณzef Piลsudski (man who literally invaded Ukraine as soon as it gained independence first time ever)
This is the real billboard that was put up in 2022 in afaik entire country. This is the level of public discourse on Ukraine issue in Poland.
That's an interesting way to short circuit a lib brain.
- Axiom 1: All land belonging to Poland at any point in history is sacred (because the bad Soviets invaded them once)
- Axiom 2: All land belonging to the Ukraine at any point in history is sacred (because the bad Russians invaded them once)
Then to whom does Eastern Galicia and Volhynia (western Ukraine) belong? It's been a part of both countries!
Mongolia? You mean Northern Taiwan 
wait what
I made a brief summary post some months ago, it even includes a map of the so-called "Polish" territories that the Soviets invaded :)
I've been listening to Proles Pod, they have a new series of episodes
They're back!?
Were they ever gone? I started listening to them recently
Yeah the group had a falling out some time around 2020 IIRC
Edit: ~~Must have been 2021. I just checked their site and there is a three year gap between 2021-07-31 and 2024-03-11~~
Edit2: A reddit comment dated from 2020 talks about the split, so maybe it actually was 2020
A new episode came out a month or so ago [August 2020] about Romania. It was something they recorded a year ago. He spoke about things at the end of the episode, and said he's gonna put out one more that they recorded while still together.
A Reddit link was detected in your comment. Here are links to the same location on alternative frontends that protect your privacy.
I didnt know that thanks for the info
I think I short circuited a liberal brain when I told them about the Soviet-Polish war before WW2
They genuinely had no idea it happened.
If you wanna see, I made a map showing the "Polish" territories that the Soviets occupied in a previous post.
Anti-communism, an infantile disorder.
:zhukov: "We have liberated Europe from fascism, but they will never forgive us for it."
"Nazis and communists are actually the same thing and exactly as bad as each other, that's why we need to support nazis in places like Ukraine and the US unconditionally, or else the commies win!"
Sounds like official US foreign policy during the Cold War.
and now tbh
We used to support Nazis to thwart Communism. We still do, but we used to too.
