something makes me think that this user does care about the french, british and danish civilians even though they "collaborated" with the nazis
this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2025
94 points (96.1% liked)
Slop.
705 readers
341 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 11 months ago
MODERATORS
I'm pretty sure the user is American, so I'm guessing their subconscious biases aren't quite so mad at those.
load more comments
(4 replies)
The Russians got their just desserts.
27 million people.
Edit: it's staggering. It's just unimaginable. How could anyone look at that number and feel nothing?
Thread locked, so I can't even reply to the mod there. The user was repeatedly told that 27 million Soviet citizens died in the fight against Nazism and repeatedly insisted that they deserved it. That's ~~unambiguous genocide denial~~ unambiguously genocidal.
It’s worse than genocide denial. It’s saying they deserved to be genocided.
@Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com (Unruffled), I have to tag you here since you locked the thread on db0. Please point me to these Hexbear moderators that supposedly defended the fascist murder of almost 30 million people because their leaders were the wrong kind of leftist and weren't banned for it. Forget demodding them, I'll gladly petition the admins here to ban them for advocating genocide.
I noticed the following in your profile when I went to find your username to tag you.
"In every State, the government is nothing but a permanent conspiracy on the part of the minority against the majority, which it enslaves and fleeces."
- Mikhail Bakunin
Do you think your own ethics and philosophy (for example, this Bakunin quote) are consistent with the stance taken by _cryptagion? Logically, this user's statements should be at least as repulsive to you as they are to us.
Fitting that someone running interference for a Nazi apologist has a quote from a rabid antisemite in their profile
load more comments
(6 replies)
@Alaskaball@hexbear.net @CARCOSA@hexbear.net sorry to bother you both with this, but surely this isn't the official policy of db0, an anarchist instance that we are federated with? That it's OK to say nearly 30 million people deserved to be murdered and ethnically cleansed by fascist colonialism because they were citizens of the USSR and therefore "Authoritarian"? I have to believe that these moderators don't represent instance policy there.
Yes this is no bother and quite disgusting to he honest.
However inaction was predicted by some mods. I mean sure sometimes hexbear users go into divisionsby0 posts to discuss and argue but I am very sure that we don't have hexbear users making "provocateur" posts in their communities let alone celebrating the death of millions, no?
Even on the topic of historical disagreements and violence between ML and anarchists I know hexbear users would focus on the historical events or ideological discussion not "lol all those anarchists deserved to die"
Let's see if any examples can be found for hexbear users making "provocateur" posts.
As long as this user who is encouraging members of divisonsbyzero to make posts that celebrate genocide is a member of their modteam it is not a safe instance to federated with.
If you would like to make a defederation request it is understandable as this goes beyond one admin or one user and speaks to what content is ok for an instance as well the fact that of we remain federated there is no way to know that we won't have more of their users encouraged by the provocateur to make gleeful posts about the death of millions aka genocide.
load more comments
(4 replies)
I have to say, I've generally seen OK posts from other db0 users. Nothing that would have led me to believe that they would say or condone anything like this.
load more comments
(8 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
Today i Learned, Campism is when you say nazi apologism is bad
I know it's not the new part, but "events that happened 80+ years ago" to minimize an actual genocide. Imagine someone saying that about the Holocaust.
Imagine someone saying that about the Holocaust.
No need to imagine, I'm sure a visit to a neo-Nazi forum would find plenty of people willing to say it.
They're saying it about the people who ended the Holocaust. 
I've heard, "it was so long ago why do you even care about it" about slavery, civil rights, women's suffrage. Somehow they always end up being a Nazi.
load more comments
(2 replies)
Yea, not sure how you can truly defend "the 27 million soviets deserved it," that's just such an absurd statement that goes fully into fascism.
Hitler's rise was funded by US and British capitalists so he could act as an attack dog against the Soviet Union and prevent the rise of communism in Germany. Stalin's plea to form an alliance against Germany was rejected by the West.
If anyone wants to convince libs of this we're gonna need some wikipedia sourcing on this, and the article best showing the Soviet policy in the 1930s of collective security is that of Maxim Litvinov, People's Commissar of Foreign Affairs from 1930 to 1939:
In 1930, Joseph Stalin appointed Litvinov People's Commissar for Foreign Affairs. Litvinov, who was a firm believer in collective security, worked to form a closer relationship with France and the United Kingdom
In 1935, Litvinov negotiated the Franco-Soviet Treaty of Mutual Assistance and another treaty with Czechoslovakia with the aim of containing Nazi Germany's aggression. Writing in A History of the League of Nations (1952), F. P. Walters expressed "astonished admiration", praising Litvinov's farsighted analysis:
No future historian will lightly disagree with any views expressed by Litvinov on international questions ... Nothing in the annals of the League can compare with them in frankness, in debating power, in the acute diagnosis of each situation. No contemporary statesman could point to such a record of criticisms justified and prophecies fulfilled
Litvinov has been considered to have concentrated on taking strong measures against Italy, Japan and Germany, and being little interested in other matters
On 15 April 1939, Litvinov sent a comprehensive proposal to Stalin for a tripartite agreement with Britain and France. The following day, Litvinov saw Stalin to discuss his draft, which Stalin approved. According to Soviet records, Litvinov submitted detailed arguments in favour of the proposed pact, which Stalin accepted. Litvinov stated they ought not to wait for the other side to propose what the Soviets wanted. Litvinov summarised his proposals, which were for mutual assistance in case of aggression against the Soviet Union, Britain or France; and support for all states bordering the Soviet Union, including Finland and the Baltic States. It also provided for rapid agreement on the form such assistance would take. There would be an agreement not to conclude a separate peace.
By 16 April, Stalin still had faith in Litvinov and had no immediate plans to remove him. No concrete proposals for a Nazi-Soviet pact had been made by either country. Litvinov said: "We can expect urgent and complex negotiations with the French and especially the British. We need to monitor public opinion and try to influence it. "The new proposals had Stalin's support; Litvinov summoned the British Ambassador, William Seeds, while he was at the theatre with his wife. Litvinov could have had the proposals conveyed to the Embassy with a request for Seeds to visit Litvinov urgently in the morning.
Litvinov had a poor opinion of Neville Chamberlain, and was not surprised Russia's proposal for an alliance was not welcomed, but he may have been surprised by the attitude of the British Foreign Office. Alexander Cadogan, in his diary, described Litvinov's proposals as "mischievous". A Foreign Office report to the Foreign Affairs Cabinet Committee termed them 'inconvenient'. On 7 June 1939, Winston Churchill stated he "much preferred the Russian proposals. They are simple. They are logical and conform to the main groupings of common interest." Churchill also stated the Soviet claim the Baltic States should be included in the triple guarantee was well founded. Three years later, Britain would agree a similar pact of assistance with the Soviet Union. Litvinov's proposals were also conveyed to the French Ambassador Émile Naggiar.
As soon as the proposals reached the French Government, the first reaction of Georges Bonnet, the Foreign Minister, was different from that of the British Government and Foreign Office. Bonnet saw the Soviet Ambassador Jakob Suritz, who cabled that "the first impression of the French is very favourable".Britain persuaded the French Government to take no action until a common policy had been formulated. In talks between the French and the British governments, both failed to either accept or reject the proposals until after Litvinov's dismissal on 4 May. Molotov proceeded with negotiations for a pact and a military mission left for Moscow.
The Foreign Office confirmed to the US chargé d'affaires on 8 August 1939 "the military mission, which had now left for Moscow, had been told to make every effort to prolong discussions until 1 October 1939". Lord Halifax the British Foreign Secretary, disclosed to the Foreign Affairs Committee on 10 July 1939: "Although the French were in favour of the military conversations commencing, the French Government thought that the military conversations would be spun out over a long time and as long as they were taking place we should be preventing Soviet Russia from entering the German camp.
Although the French were in favour of the military conversations commencing, the French Government thought that the military conversations would be spun out over a long time and as long as they were taking place we should be preventing Soviet Russia from entering the German camp.
From a country that had signed a pact with Germany a year prior.
I didn't even bother arguing the history, to be honest. Even if you take the building block of "the Soviet leadership were Nazi collaborators" at face value (and I agree with you that they were not), the user's stance is abhorrent. It's a basic failure in morality that's almost beyond belief, and the only "ideology" I can think of that it's consistent with is fascism.
I said it before and I'll say it again: Liberals hypocrisy monger over "queers for Palestine" because they can't grasp the idea of being opposed to genocide on principle.
Totally agreed. However, I expected better from people who call themselves leftists. I'd be shocked if db0 users were upset at "queers for Palestine", and I'd be shocked if the actions of this moderator reflected a consensus across their user base.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It's also worth noting that the whole "soviet citizens deserved genocide" stance is a recurring hill for cryptagion to die on and that he was banned from Hexbear previously for doing it on his dbzer0 account.
This is a sincerely held belief that he keeps coming back to, not some one off trolling attempt he didn't think through completely. I can't understand why a supposedly anarchist instance would tolerate someone with such a worldview.
Yea, cryptagion goes well beyond reasonable anarchist critique of Marxists into full fascism.
load more comments
(1 replies)
That is probably why he jumped to tell Kitty to repost that stance as he knew it is something that would get us to ban her. Not only is it his disgusting worldview he is abusing his place as a mod and power-user to get other divisionsbyzero users to make posts based on that worldview.
for every historical illiterate that wanders in here: the French literally had a military alliance with the USSR in 1935 that they abandoned in favor of pro-German appeasement. The Western Allies are the ones who killed a collective security strategy against the Nazis!
As I said in thread from the goaded user, there are so many things wrong with this, but let's just say for the sake of argument that Stalin was a red fascist who was gay for Hitler and wanted to be his best friend and also wanted to help perpetrate the Holocaust and add as many things as you like and say it's true of the entire Politburo too, it was all just Wehraboos top to bottom:
Stalin wasn't killed in WWII, it was normal citizens of the USSR who were killed by the millions. What the fuck do you mean "the Soviets" weren't the victims of WWII? Those civilians, those millions upon millions of people unambiguously subjected to a racial-supremacist genocide, are also Soviets! And so were the Red Army soldiers who were summarily executed after they were captured or, you know, were conscripted regardless in most cases, and again were killed by the millions.
Want to say Stalin's son had it coming? Go ahead, I don't give a shit. Want to say Stalin had every bad thing that ever happened to him coming? Whatever. But saying "The Soviets" weren't victims is absolutely minimizing the moral outrage of the Nazi-led genocide and that user should be regarded as having done a Horseshit Theory all the way around to agreeing with fascists that some ethnically-Polish dirt farmers and their fucking children had it coming when the OUN-B slaughtered them.
It's so disgusting that the historical revisionist attitude regarding the M-R treaty doesn't even register anymore. Like, normal American liberals don't say this sort of thing, even they would be appalled by it, and when the American liberals are standing up for the Soviets relative to you, you've really fucked up being an "anarchist" and let your personal resentment of "tankies" just completely consume you as a person, at least on a moral and political-theoretical level.
Edit: @unruffled@anarchist.nexus I forget if tags work on edits
Going into DBzero's comms and posting jews deserved the holocaust because some were Anarchists/Bundists (its fine im just ragebaiting) /s
This is actually the exactly analogous political position. Jesus Christ. Can you imagine if someone here (from our ML members) or on grad said this? The admins would nuke them from orbit - thankfully.
load more comments
(4 replies)
You're not a Nazi you're just a silly little provacetuer.
@Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com
Pardon the fact I'm drawing from a comment I made three years ago to make this point; you are "agreeing to disagree" that the deaths of 27 million Soviet peoples - which I remind you that as the Soviets were multicultural federation means white European Russians weren't the only people dying - was just "The Russians getting their just desserts", therefore I think you are at least obliged to read what just desserts you are defending.
__
Relating to the siege of Leningrad I recently learned in looking up information on a plot point in the movie The North Star relating to what the nazi doctors were doing to save the lives of nazi invaders, and
CW: Crimes against Humanity, genocide, physician malpractice
Much like how the doctors in the movie were killing children by draining them of their blood and saving the lives of nazi soldiers through blood transfusions, there was a concentration camp just south-west of Leningrad where a mass grave of 1,362 bodies, with 675 of them the bodies of babies and children, was discovered a few years back. It was called the Vyritsa Children's Concentration Camp. It was there that children across the occupied Leningrad region were rounded up and interred there for the purposes of using them as prison labor as well as a "medical resupply center". Here's an excerpt from one woman who survived there.
Nadezhda Gavrilovna Belezekova (she was then four years old) recalled how they "crawled under the fence, from which one could reach the bridge over the Oredezh with one's hand." On the other side of the shore, adults lived and worked. The dogs that were assigned to guard the camp did not bark and did not give out children, as they knew each prisoner well. Already after the war, N.G. Belezekova learned that “a woman who lived in the same barracks with her mother regularly “knocked” on the fugitives”, and that thanks to her “efforts”, Nadezhda once almost died in the punishment cell.
Children were punished in a variety of ways: they were beaten with a whip, deprived of lunch, placed in a punishment cell - a cold and damp basement of an old stone building. From more healthy children, the Nazis periodically took blood for their wounded soldiers and officers. As a rule, these children did not survive later ... Although, fortunately, this fate has passed for many. According to some prisoners, the children were repeatedly taken somewhere, after which they disappeared.
In the evenings, an ambulance came to the camp, ostensibly for “disinfection”. Former prisoner Alexander Roslov recalled : “In Vyritsa, I sat in a bunker (punishment cell) more than once, when I said the wrong thing, ran the wrong way. I cannot say that they took blood in the camp. But my sister Lena Roslova died there, in the infirmary. She said: “Sasha, take me out of here. I don't even have blood anymore, but they take everything. She was gone the next day."
Source: Newspaper Gatchinskaya Pravda
The more I read from the pages of history, the deeper my belief that fascism must be opposed at all costs. Nothing short of the total extermination of fascism must be acceptable.
I just adore that these fucks are like "well, the soviets actually agreed to just not outright attack the nazis (same as everyone else on the planet did) and that means using their children as bloodbags is okay"
it is october 15 2025 and the Soviet Union saved the world from fascism (for a while)
@Flatworm7591@lemmy.dbzer0.com Hey, this user is not "a bit of a provocateur." This is a fascist tumor and it should have been swiftly excised. You need to do a complete 180 on the position articulated here if you want to maintain any credibility as a supposed antifascist.
If they're a bit of a provocateur then Mao Zedong was a bit controversial
load more comments
(7 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
Just adding to others posting useful info for those wandering in:
The communists spent the decade prior trying to form an anti-Nazi coalition force, such as the Anglo-French-Soviet Alliance which was pitched by the communists and rejected by the British and French. The communists hated the Nazis from the beginning, as the Nazi party rose to prominence by killing communists and labor organizers, cemented bourgeois rule, and was violently racist and imperialist, while the communists opposed all of that.
When the many talks of alliances with the west all fell short, the Soviets reluctantly agreed to sign a non-agression pact, in order to delay the coming war that everyone knew was happening soon. Throughout the last decade, Britain, France, and other western countries had formed pacts with Nazi Germany, such as the Four-Power Pact, the German-French-Non-Agression Pact, and more. Molotov-Ribbentrop was unique among the non-agression pacts with Nazi Germany in that it was right on the eve of war, and was the first between the USSR and Nazi Germany. It was a last resort, when the west was content from the beginning with working alongside Hitler.
Harry Truman, in 1941 in front of the Senate, stated:
If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible, although I don’t want to see Hitler victorious under any circumstances.
Not only that, but it was the Soviet Union that was responsible for 4/5ths of total Nazi deaths, and winning the war against the Nazis. The Soviet Union did not agree to invade Poland with the Nazis, it was about spheres of influence and red lines the Nazis should not cross in Poland. When the USSR went into Poland, it stayed mostly to areas Poland had invaded and annexed a few decades prior. Should the Soviets have let Poland get entirely taken over by the Nazis, standing idle? The West made it clear that they were never going to help anyone against the Nazis until it was their turn to be targeted.
load more comments
(4 replies)
And to be honest, you also have a few users on your instance that make hyperbolic statements in the other direction
True only when the other direction is
Ye power trippin bastards 
The USSR also never took any Polish territory -- they simply liberated Russian territories which Poland had occupied the previous decade, and was still forcibly assimilating ("polonization") in a real process that can be compared to the Uyghur genocide. Any "free uyghur" person with moral consistency must support the invasion of the second polish republic. It's also worth considering that Poland too, was "allied with the nazi's" when it invaded and occupied parts of the Czech republic in concert with the nazi offensive.
It's a good lesson that truth literally does not matter to historical collective reality.
Me when I have very well thought out and not at all grudge-based political opinions about what 27 million murder victims deserved
What the hell? Not banning the guy would be ridiculous, but not even removing him from his position of power? That's unthinkable.
I find that argument especially ridiculous since France and Britain just handed the Axis a big chunk Czechoslovakia on a silver platter. In exchange for "peace", lmao.
Meanwhile, Poland had almost entirely fallen by the time the Soviet Union was involved. The USSR gave Germany nothing of Poland, the Germans took it for themselves, and the Soviet invasion weeks later gained the Germans basically nothing.
And let's not forget, Poland collaborated with Nazi Germany as well. When Germany started their offensive into Czechoslovakia, Poland started their own, and were rewarded with land for it. A worse collaboration, if anything.
So really, if we're to follow their stated logic (which we shouldn't), almost all European victims got their "just desserts". In reality, if even just a small number of countries listened to the USSR (Poland and Romania, or Britain and France), and formed a military agreement, Hitler and the holocaust could have been nipped in the bud.
reality, if even just a small number of countries listened to the USSR (Poland and Romania, or Britain and France), and formed a military agreement
They had an agreement! The French literally had a military alliance they "reluctantly signed" with the USSR in 1935! Including Czechoslovakia too! But the goddamn liberals were too anti-communist to follow through and literally got millions killed over it.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)
view more: next ›