Did she deserve it?
>>1157848
Yes.
Nobles can suck on Lenin's mummified dick.
>>1157848
Only lonely reactionaryfag virgins will say no
>>1157853
>only lonely reactionaryfag virgins will say no to a young woman being murdered in cold blood
pinkos are soulless
you'd enjoy the gulags
>>1157868
Boohoo, it must be so hard for your waifu to be dead ;(
>>1157868
The fact that it's still making right-wingers assmad 100 years after the fact makes it all worth it.
>>1157848
Of course not, but Gommies unironically believe that people born in a certain class are "good" or "evil" and that they can't be changed for the better, so it's not use arguing with them about it.
>>1157848
No and everyone said she did is just being edgy.
But it's not really important if she deserved it, to be honest. That's not how war works.
>>1157874
is empathy unique to right-wingers?
She didnt deserve it, but it was necessary from a bolshevik standpoint
>>1157886
It's not a matter of her being inherently evil, it's a matter of the fact that her very existence would provide a symbol for monarchists to rally around and for foreign powers to invade to restore.
If you kill her you solve this problem.
I still can't understand why the children were executed. Why not just exile them or something?
>>1157895
>g-go to leftypol
Kool story bruh
>>1157893
Giving a shit about nobles that got killed near a century ago is.
No one gives a fuck that the roundheads killed Charles II, and rightly so because it's pointless to cry about.
>>1157898
Im not that guy, but that still doesnt mean she "deserved it"
You are right tho, it was necessary
>>1157901
Because their British cousins might invade to restore them. And killing literally every pretender of note would be extremely demoralizing to monarchist forces.
>>1157906
Stay mad.
>>1157903
That was Charles 1
Charles 2 just had a spaz fit and died peacefully at home
>>1157910
>Because their British cousins might invade to restore them.
in what world?
>>1157910
I see. Crude, but very effective.
>>1157919
It happened to the French revolution, there was no reason to believe it wouldn't happen to the Bolsheviks.
>>1157914
>Killing people who literally dindu nuffin because they were born in the wrong family
>>1157925
>what is proximity
France is a coin flip across the pond, and the French Revolution wasn't after WWI
>>1157929
Yes.
>>1157931
Yes, and Russia was right beside the British Raj.
And not to mention the French revolution was immediately after a seriously disruptive time for Europe, not least of all Britain who lost the lions share of their empire.
Innocents never deserve their misfortune
>>1157929
and have a claim to the throne...without people with claims to the throne, you cant really reinstate a monarchy...which was a goal of the anti-soviet coalition
>>1157848
Of course not.
Let me ask: why is her death more tragic than the tens of thousands of young girls murdered by Cossacks?
>>1157951
invading through fucking Siberia is a bit harder than invading through Euro Russia, they didn't have enough soldiers stationed in the Raj that could be spared for an invasion either
British Empire was certainly in better shape post-murican revolution than post-WWI as well
>>1157906
It's necessary. You can't make an omelette without cracking eggs
>>1157983
>tens of thousands of young girls murdered by Cossacks?
source?
>>1157929
>Killing people who literally dindu nuffin because enemy is about to capture the city and these innocent people could be used to consolidate your enemies or became a figurehead foreign nations can actively support against you
Yeah, it was a dick move, but it was justified from Bolsheviks' point of view, i.e. I would do the same if I was one of them at the time - if the Whites would capture a single Romanov they would get a lot more international and local support. Peasants would surely support Romanovs, being retarded reactionaries they were.
>>1157848
Yes.
>>1157984
1. You're not invading through Siberia, you're invading through the steppe of central Asia.
2. The Raj was absolutely full of soldiers, in the Burma campaign of WW2 they literally had a million soldiers there.
>>1157985
That's funny, the last time i checked the earth wasn't a fucking omelette.
>>1158035
It's a metaphor, silly boy.
at the end of the day they murdered a young girl
a fitting beginning to a twisted and evil nation
>>1158039
The USSR's only mistake was not being communist enough.
>>1158053
Being Gommunist was it's greatest mistake.
>>1158084
>Be not communist, is shithole
>Become communist, things massively improve
>Stop being communist, things massively degenerate.
The pattern is clear.
She looks kinda smug in that picture.
Almost as smug as a certain philosopher.
>>1158089
>things massively improve
Tell that to the MILLIONS of people murdered by a Communist regime.
Of course, you'll just rebut with the old No True Communist line.
>>1158098
Tell that to the M I L L I O N S of people murdered by the capitalist British empire.
>>1157848
No. She was a non-combatant and should not have been harmed.
>>1158110
Pretty Stalin and his butt buddies murdered a hell of a lot more people than the old empires could ever manage, famalamborghini.
>>1158110
non-whites don't count
>>1158118
They did not.
Unless you take the retarded line that they killed 60 gorillion, which has been conclusively proven untrue since Soviet records were declassified.
>>1158118
>murdered more people than the old empires could ever manage
Yeah no m8
>>1158124
Sorry, 20 million is more accurate.
>>1158129
The British raj puts that figure to shame.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_major_famines_in_India_during_British_rule
>>1158127
>Responding with a non-dank /leftypol/ meme
I assume you have no arguement?
>>1158131
>uhhhh, no the legit records aren't true. Only estimates from American rabid anti-communist authors are true.
Class-traitors, not even once.
>>1158127
Oh, I get it, you must be taig
>>1158141
I never said the documents were wrong, you illiterate mongoloid, I said they only published the documents that didn't damage the Soviet Union's reputation too much.
>>1158149
Okay, what haven't they declassified then.
>>1158089
Dude, the soviet union collapsed because it wasn't sustainable and the soviet union even at it's best couldn't compare to any given industrialized nation.
>>1158110
>Buh what about
No. That doesn't work.
The massacres and atrocities of capitalist nations whatever they may be do not justify your own atrocities.
>>1158159
I don't know, because it's CLASSIFIED.
We're both stupid, I know.
>>1157898
First of all, that doesn't mean she deserves it.
Second of all, even from the machiavellian bolshevik point of view, isn't it better not to kill her? Doesn't she become a martyr if you kill her so brutally?
>>1157919
Well, maybe not great britain, but surely some monarchist european country would attempt something like that, if they could.
>>1158139
no you are simply wrong, if you dont go by the claims that communists killed litterally half the planet, the numbers simply dont add up in your arguments favor.
Not if you understand that
>capitalism drove colonialism from the 17th century onward
>deaths by 'famine you didnt give a shit about' have to count for the colonies as well (at least if you want to count the holodomor on the soviet deathtoll)
Its just math man...
>>1158165
>the soviet union collapsed because it wasn't sustainable
So unsustainable that it lasted for 70 years...
>>1158162
I just understand that you have an impression of a system that hopelessly skewed because of the proportionate loss in your history
>>1158165
>Dude, the soviet union collapsed because it wasn't sustainable and the soviet union even at it's best couldn't compare to any given industrialized nation.
1. The USSR collapsed mostly because of their shitty bureaucracy as opposed to economic reasons (although those definitely accelerated the whole thing)
2. Russia could never compare to western imperialist nations, but the USSR brought them a long way into doing so.
>The massacres and atrocities of capitalist nations whatever they may be do not justify your own atrocities.
I'm not defending the atrocities of the USSR, not once have I tried to absolve the Soviets of Holodomor or the like. I'm pointing out that it's retarded to use such tactics as an argument against communism as if they're exclusive and inherent to it.
>>1158180
ye maybe spain or denmark
>>1158171
Kill one noble and you make a martyr.
Kill them all and you kill the monarchist cause with them.
>>1158200
I don't see how. Especially when "them all" includes some very young children, with crippling disabilities, I might add.
>>1158190
Wow one human lifetime. Much impressive and longevity.
>>1158200
weren't they ALL canonized?
>>1158208
Because you cannot be a monarchist when there is no one to install to the throne.
>>1158190
We're talking about nations here, friend.
In this day and age, things move so fast, socially, we consider 70 years to be a long time. But, in reality, it's nothing on the level of a nation state.
>>1158214
You can't be pro-romanov if there are no romanovs, I agree. But that doesn't mean you can't be anti-bolshevik.
>>1158212
They were all canonized by the ROCOR, but it only exists to be asshurt about communism anyway.
In mainstream orthodoxy some of them were beatified, and I think like one who was a distant cousin that became a nun was canonized proper.
>>1158221
Yes, which is why by this point the republicans were the chief enemy since you can't kill an idea.
>>1158199
>but that doesn't justify thr USSR's atrocities
sure as shit dosnt, but the whole "the communist are litterally the worst people that have ever existed, the did like 10 holocausts!!" 'argument' that often comes with these numbers is invalid...
>>1158210
>Wow, 70 whole years. Such an achievement.
>Wow one human lifetime. Much impressive and longevity.
Well one could name a hell of a lot states that didnt last even 70 years...
>>1158229
But surely most who were monarchists joined the republicans.
>>1158230
I apologize, I misconstrued your words, thinking that you were trying to excuse the USSR of them.
But for a nation as big as the USSR was, 70 years is like a drop in the bucket. Impressive in its own right, but nothing very spectacular.
>>1158242
Probably.
But clearly the Soviets made the right call since the republicans lost.
>>1158197
>>I'm not defending the atrocities of the USSR, not once have I tried to absolve the Soviets of Holodomor or the like. I'm pointing out that it's retarded to use such tactics as an argument against communism as if they're exclusive and inherent to it.
Well if say communism is supposed to be better then say a democratic state with a regulated market economy and social programs to aid the poor then you need to explain to me why just about every attempt at communism I can think of has involved lots and lots of murder.
What's more, most of the bolshevik violence was internal, something you really can't say about a lot of the capitalist nations like the US, UK, France, etc.
>>1157965
But they did not kill all the Romanovs, the line of succession was still well alive.
>>1158274
yes but the rest had to leave russia, no romanovs in russia makes reinstating them a lot harder
>>1158273
Because state building is naturally an extremely chaotic process.
I mean the USA has basically wiped an entire race of people off the face of the Earth in their process of creating their state
>>1158280
Yeah, but dude? Those were injuns. Outsiders. Every nation in existence has wiped out outside groups considered a threat. The list of nations that create the sorts of internal slaughters that the USSR has is pretty limited by comparison and most such places are not ones I'd like to live in.
>>1157901
Because that's how George R. R. Martin wrote the script.
>>1158289
You could apply that to Ukrainians or whoever you like to absolve a state of their crimes against humanity.
It doesn't make it a very compelling argument.
>>1158165
The Soviet Union was not unsustainable.
>>1158299
No you can't actually, because Ukranians were subjects of the Russian empire that the communists usurped.
>>1158289
>Every nation in existence has wiped out outside groups considered a threat
>Litterally excusing every genocide ever
Thats a very shit argument...
>>1158304
Yes and so were the Cherokee in the trail of tears.
It's a fucking stupid argument.
>>1158302
Yeah it was, if it weren't the soviet union would still exist right now, which it obviously does not.
>>1158312
No they weren't actually, the cherokee were allies that we backstabbed. They weren't considered citizens, which is why treating them so viciously was considered acceptable, and I'm pretty damn sure that what happened to them is not comparable in terms of scale with what the USSR did
>>1158321
yeah your right, the USSR did not almost completley wiped out an entire race...
>>1158321
>It's okay because we didn't even acknowledge them as citizens.
I hope you realize that only makes it worse.
>and I'm pretty damn sure that what happened to them is not comparable in terms of scale with what the USSR did
Ukrainians still exist and are independent.
Native Americans got absolutely fucking decimated.
>>1158327
>I hope you realize that only makes it worse.
Never said it was okay, I said it was a different kind of atrocity, one every state ever has done.
>>Native Americans got absolutely fucking decimated.
Mostly by disease long before the declaration of independence was ever signed.
>>1158338
>Never said it was okay, I said it was a different kind of atrocity, one every state ever has done.
That's exactly my point, every state ever does this in the process of creating itself so it's dumb to whine about the USSR doing it.
>Mostly by disease long before the declaration of independence was ever signed.
You do realize there were native Americans west of the Appalachians as well?
>>1158307
Not trying to excuse genocides. I'm saying that communism doesn't appeal to me because it is better to stick with the oppression you know rather then a new one that will possibly murder you simply for being somewhat better off then average.
>>1158338
>Mostly by disease long before the declaration of independence was ever signed.
And that makes it ok to 'finish the job'?
Also ther is like 200 years between the initial wave of deaths by european deseases and manifest destiny
>>1158348
>thats how communism works
just stay away from juche, stalinists and maoists and youll be fine...enjoy a diverse form of ideology
(not even they were that batshit honestly, they didnt purge people based on thier income or anything)
>>1158346
>>every state ever does this in the process of creating itself so it's dumb to whine about the USSR doing it.
No actually, not every state does this. The USA did not round up and kill all the loyalists after it won the revolution, the Federal Republic of Germany did not round up and kill all the members of the wehrmacht who still lived there after ww2 was over.
The path of internal mass-murder is a poor path for a state to head down and reflects poorly upon the government that engages in such things.
>>1157848
No.
>>1158350
I'm not saying anything is okay morally.
>>Also ther is like 200 years between the initial wave of deaths by european deseases and manifest destiny
Yes and? Most of the deaths occurred due to diseases brought by the first europeans to arrive on the continent. By the time the US cavalry and the Texas rangers were doing their thing the natives had already lost most of their population.
>>1158110
>commie goes whatboutism
Every time holy shit, kek.
How many young girls were raped by loyal Cossacks and tied to horses and dragged to death? How many atrocities were done for the ruler of Moscow? Novgorod lay in ruins, its stripped-naked maidens tossed into freezing rivers. What of the Poles, what of the Lithuanians, what of the Tatars?
Right wingers cry for just one family. We cry for the world.
>>1158375
>the natives had already lost most of their population.
yes but they werent dying of those deseases anymore...you make it sound like the natives were going to die anyways...no they werent...
>saying anything is okay morally
You do provide an explanation for it...a bad one, one that sound pretty close to "oh it was ok, thats normal"
>>1158393
I never said it was moral, I said it was the natural course of a nation's expansion. Killing off tons of your own citizens isn't.
>>1158386
>We cry for the world
>>1158363
Why do that when a regulated capitalist economy with social programs to aid and protect the poor does the same without all the downsides?
>its another "fat neckbeards compare dick sizes over their preferred economic system" episode
This thread is a reminder that the preemptive killing of Marxists and other socialist scum is fully justified, and failure to do so is actually unjust.
>Mfw these Soviet apologists would be the first against the wall if they lived in the time period.
Your existence is a function of your ability to live in a capitalistic society. You're welcome :).
>>1158386
both are cruel and unjustifiable
but the fact that commies are literally cheering and celebrating killing an innocent girl because she's royalty makes it disgusting
>>1158473
this
This thread is proof that lefty/pol/ is just as terrible as regular /pol/.
>>1157903
>thinking that something was bad is wrong because it was a long time ago
Uh-huh...
>>1158443
>>1158423
>without all the downsides
go ask a 14yo bangladeshi girl about the downsides
>I said it was the natural course of a nation's expansion
that statement just dosnt hold up...America and Australia and NZ are probably the only countries based on Genocide, sure there was a lot of killing involved with the creation of all other nations, but no others wiped out almost the entirety of thier indigenous population
>>1158493
Not really relevant to me frankly. A bolshevik style revolution in my country would likely lead to my death or enslavement, therefore I will not support such a thing.
>>that statement just dosnt hold up...America and Australia and NZ are probably the only countries based on Genocide, sure there was a lot of killing involved with the creation of all other nations, but no others wiped out almost the entirety of thier indigenous population
It really depends on how you define genocide. But that aside, most nations actually do commit violence against groups of outsiders as they expand their borders and sphere's of influence. Genocide is only one of the more extreme forms of said violence.
>>1158493
>America and Australia and NZ are probably the only countries based on Genocide
>>1158531
go on, name a few others
>>1158523
>bolshevik style revolution
no one exept a very small minority of retards advocates for bolshevism...
(yeah seems like i forgot to add trotzkieites and MLs to my "avoid these idiots" statement...)
>>1158539
Canada
Japan
Israel
China
Russia
>>1158473
The royalty of Europe cheered when the students were massacred in the uprisings of the early 19th century. By your own standard the royalty are disgusting.
Stop pretending that there was some kind of thoughtful reason behind killing the royal family. It has nothing to do with inheritance, class, or any of that shit you fucking nutbags ITT, everyone saying this is a fucking retard. The Bolsheviks literally just chimped out because the Czech legion was about to liberate Ekaterinburg.
>>1158561
>Israel
calling the nabkar a genocide is a bit of a strech isnt it?
>Canada
Goes with USA, forgot that... (fuck u im tired)
>Japan
One forgets the Ainu very quickly
>China
>Russia
Enlighten me...dont the indegenous populations of russia still exist in "normal" numbers?
And didnt the Han (mostly) just assimilate other, closely related ethnic groups?
>>1158561
Ok Russia and China count as well
>>1158598
If you count "genocided" as the cultural destruction of a certain ethnic group then yeah, the Chinese and Russians count
>>1158584
>Czech legion was about to liberate Ekaterinburg
meaning they would have had the royal family, which the Bolsheviks were afraid imperialists would rally around, so they killed them. more calculated than just "chimping out".
>>1158567
yes they are, as long as these students are really innocent (a.k.a no killing and destruction which justifies hate towards them) i don't know why you would think otherwise
I understand hate toward the tsar but extending it to his family, including his children and celebrating their killing is paranoid
>>1158611
>hmm guys what should we do about the royal family?
>maybe send them to exile?
>no, just strip them off their royal titles and have them be an ordinary Russian family
>I have a better idea, send them to a labor camp!
>OH SHIT NIGGER THE CZECHOSLOVAKS ARE AT THE GATES, KILL THE TSAR ASAP
It was a knee jerk chimpout reaction.
>>1158626
According to Trotsky, Sverdlov told him that "We decided it here. Lenin believed that we shouldn't leave the Whites a live banner to rally around, especially under the present difficult circumstances". It certainly doesn't sound like a decision they made at the last second.
>>1158386
the problem is that there is virtually no one who will turn around and say that those things are justified.
As evidenced by this thread, there are plenty of leftist edgelords who will say that her death was nothing.
>>1157903
Charles was a legit cunt though, nicky was a bro
>>1157903
By that logic I no longer need to give a shit about the Holocaust because it happened some time ago.
>>1158461
this
>>1158483
You can actually criticise the third reich on /pol/ and get some answers other than deflection from some.
Extremists, regardless of their background are a scourge which should be purged from any sort of aspect of life whatsoever.
People seem to lack sight of the middle-ground.
>>1160132
This.
Centrists unite.
>>1157919
Great Britain was afraid of their own socialists. There is a reason why the English did not grant exile to the Tsar.
>>1157874
This is literally so fucking ironic considering the amount of Commie tears in the Rosa Luxembourg thread yesterday.
>>1158200
>Kill one noble and you make a martyr.
>Kill them all and you kill the monarchist cause with them.
Sure, it worked in the USSR, but all it did was further prove to Western Europeans that Communism was not to be trusted with the idea of basic human dignities. Why do you think Communism could never get a solid foothold west of Russia without overwhelming Soviet military presence after ww2?
Killing the Romanovs killed the feasibility of a Socialist revolution. You made martyrs out of them regardless.
>>1157989
I overheard some cossacks bragging about it, and they were whipping someone while they did
>>1157848
Hardly.
The romanovs had conceded power to the provisional government. They murdered them out of spite.
If that's not pure evil, I don't know what is.
it hurts.... Nicky didnt deserve it
>>1157903
Edgy.
>>1157848
They probably didn't deserve to be messily executed like they were but it could be argued that it was necessary.
I don't know, sometimes unsavory things need to happen. Should 17 year olds be murdered? It depends.
>>1160983
Bismuth.
>>1160986
Not trying to be edgy, man. What would you rather have happened? The girls be sent to live on a farm while sitting on an arguably legitimate claim to rulership?
>>1160996
Yeah.
>>1160996
Don't bother arguing with an OP who doesn't understand is/ought.
>>1160996
Why not just exile them?
>>1161011
Fifel fuck off no one gives a shit about grammar.
>>1157901
because they have a claim on the throne dumbass
> Do you even ck2?
Why would they want to deal with the constant threat of a claimant (s)?
>>1157985
throw the egg in the pan and then fry it horribly while you fall over and spill your charcoal ommelet in the trashcan and then there's nothing left, that's a better analogy of gommienism
>>1161037
There are claimants to Romanov throne right at this moment.
>>1160132
>>You can actually criticise the third reich on /pol/ and get some answers other than deflection from some.
I wouldn't know honestly, when I post on /pol/ it's typically to mock tumblrites.
>>1158039
>beginning
check it again, russia was always like this since the dawn of time and they will probably be like this until the end of time
>>1158625
You are taking random posts on here as evidence? What widespread celebrations do you refer to?
>>1160102
except that wasn't pre-emptive. You know the story behind the picture?
Commies are laughable. They can't win
>>1157848
If any Romanov would have survived, Lenin would never have been able to consolidate power.
Take that as you will.
>>1157901
If there is no one who has a right to the throne there is no one to put on the throne.
>>1160310
It didn't, no one gave a fuck. Anyone who was likely to be a revolutionary communist is not the kind of person that gets salty over dead nobles.
It did however solidify the idea with the western European establishment that communism is extremely dangerous to their interests, not that they didn't already know this.
>>1157848
The Romanov's literally gave up power to the Republic, and when the February Revolution occured, it was already a Constitutional monarchy.
Marxists and socialists need to be exterminated everywhere.
>>1157848
Sins of the father
>>1164581
If the Czar hadn't personally overseen the shitshow of an Eastern Front the Russians might have actually accomplished their strategic objectives.
If you want to keep your family alive don't stake your entire empire on a war and proceed to lose horrendously.
Friendly reminder that all bolsheviks and bolshevik supporters should be boiled alive
>>1157985
You also can't make an omelette if you crack the eggs out all over the goddamned floor.
>Okay, we gotta get rid of these incompetent Nobles
>Okay, Donesky
>Alright, now we need a new Government
>Should we have some kind of Constitutional Monarchy, or what
>No, how about we adopt this demagogic sperg who wants to start MORE wars
>>1157965
It wasn't like the French Revolution.
Nobody in Europe, and especially not Russia, had any interest in reinstating the Monarchy.
Killing the Romanovs was a horrible excess that only served to vilify the Communists
>>1157848
What if she was sole survivor and grew into battle-hardened badass head of state.....
>>1165289
>horrible excess
You realize that shit like that was happening daily on both sides. It is however a gross injustice that one dead family outweighs all the others. It offends basic math, firstly.
>>1157898
Foreign Powers were too busy with WWI to fucking care about Russia's monarchy falling.
All Russia had to do was not adopt one of the most retarded branches of the most retarded political ideologies ever, and everyone would have been fine.
>>1165312
>people didn't care about Russia's monarchy falling
>during the middle of a world war in which Russia was one of the primary combatants
If America hadn't come in when it did, it probably would have ended with status quo ante bellum.
>>1165319
Oh, they cared that it fell, but not in a way that would cause them to divert troops and funds to restore it.
Let me rephrase, the certainly gave a fuck that Russia's government collapsed, but not in the way you're thinking.
They didn't care that the Royals were toppled, they cared that their greatest Eastern Ally had dropped out of the War.
>>1165307
Please, WWI is seen as a far greater tragedy than the killing of the Romanov children.
The thing that separates them is that the Romanovs were wantonly killed by their own countrymen for literally no reason other than their dad was an incompetent.
>>1165353
>dad was incompetent
>millions died due to his incompetence
>literally no reason
>>1165339
Churchill was actually quite sad about the monarchy falling.
You'd be right in that most people cared more about Brest-Litovsk than the Romanovs being deposed.
However, the potential for socialist agitation in Western Europe and America was such that the Great Powers were uniformly opposed to the Bolsheviks.
>>1165363
Due to his incompetence in War.
If he was a failure to his country, or even a traitor to his people for failing to rule in accordance to their welfare, then hold a trial and execute him.
The key words being trial and him, not his fucking family.
>>1165433
It's ok for the monarch to kill other people's family members but not ok for others to kill the monarch's family members.
ok monarcuck
>>1165363
Nicky II was incompetent AND unwilling to give up power.
In China, some general would have taken his army and fucking kicked his ass out. In fact, this actually happened at least once in Chinese history. Fuck, it also happened to King John too.
>>1165458
It's not okay to kill innocent people.
If your father is a rapist and a horse thief, you hang him, not him, his son, his wife, and his farmhand.
Why are communists so morally bankrupt and disgusting as human beings
>>1165468
>it's not ok to kill innocent people
>unless you're a monarch
monarcuck plsgo
>>1165480
Slavshit.
>>1165433
Meanwhile the czech legion the Romanovs so desperately awaited were raping and pillaging their way through the countryside. I wonder if those families received trials, or the red guards upon the Romanov's rescue would have received trials.
>>1165517
Got proof of them raping?
>>1165517
>raping
>this is what commies actually believe
>>1165468
>It's not okay to kill innocent people.
not unless the times demand it
the whole russian civil war was red terror after white terror after red terror after white terror, russians were killing each other no worse or better than syrians are killing each other right now
>>1165529
>not unless the times demand it
No, it's still wrong.
Killing innocents is never the right thing to do, even when those innocents are related to people who've killed innocents.
When you kill an innocent, even if you do it for God, Bread, and your countrymen, you're committing an affront to human dignity.
Shooting a little girl Gangland style is never not wrong.
>>1165520
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Terror_%28Russia%29#Terror_by_the_Czechoslovak_Legions
While the article doesn't specifically mention rape, I would find it hard to believe the Czechs would be the first expeditionary army up to that point not to engage in widespread rape.
>>1165526
Somehow you believe it when it happens to Berlin.
>>1165575
Sorry but I don't deal with hypotheticals regardless of how likely they may or may not be
>>1165614
But it certainly is germane to the topic because it provides a motive. Or is near certainty of death not motivating?
Clearly you have never studied the law.
>>1160996
I would rather that sociopaths ruled by an ideology of atheism, envy and sloth had not decided to start genociding at all.
>>1165750
How does Genocide even work with an Atheist system?
>>1163238
That's probably would have been a good thing, considering how horrible it was to live under the control of the bolsheviks.
>>1165793
Why did you have to ask this? Now we're going to get the christcucks streaming into the thread talking about how the commies were taking order from evil spirits or some stupid shit.
Wasn't it bad enough with just the communist idiots?
>>1165793
It's simple.
You round up a whole bunch of people and kill them based on their ethnicity or religion.
Communists were quite active in this field of human endeavor.
>>1160996
House arrest for the remainder of their lives was too much to ask for? The monarchy as an institution in Russia was destroyed after Nicky abdicated and the popularly supported Provisional Government took over.
>>1165800
Tbh I'm not sure how you can explain bolshevism outside of satanic possession. Every immoral act imaginable they glorified and celebrated.
>>1165575
>there's no evidence of them raping anyone, but they probably raped people because it was real in my mind
End yourself.
>>1157848
>>1157906
>>1157929
>This triggered Aristorcrat sympathiser
Communist revolution could not be achieved without the removal of societies previous symbols of social hierarchy, the biggest of which being royalty. Killing them was necessary.
Cry some more bitch.
>>1167053
well, i guess then communism is not for me
>>1167053
You commies got BTFO on every plane of existence, go back to being irrelevant.
>>1167080
>go back to being irrelevant.
If being irrelevant means defeating Nazi Germany, sending the first man to space, satellite to space, robot to the moon, building the first nuclear reactor and making the entire western world shit their pants continuously over the course of 45 years from the threat of nuclear annihilation then I'm all for it!
>>1167093
>literally 40 something years of relevance before the whole shithouse imploded
>only commie countries left are literally who banana republics like Cuba and DPRK
That's fucking nothing.
>>1167107
>literally 40 something years of relevance
Clearly not an argument, considering how many years of relevance some of the most important empires in history like the Mongol or Napoleonic Empires had.
>only commie countries left are literally who banana republics like Cuba and DPRK
>Implying those are Communist
>Implying any country has ever achieved Communism
get rekt Capitalcuck
>>1167117
Cuba is definitely communist.
>>1167117
>Implying any country has ever achieved Communism
Yeah it's fucking unachievable. What we call communism is what you sub 90 IQ retards call socialism, we don't have to buy into your shitty newspeak.
>>1167131
In order for communism to be using newspeak this would imply the capitalist idealogue terminology is correct.
>>1167137
What are you even babbling about you retard
>>1167140
You assume western popular understanding of terminology is correct and communist understanding of terminology is newspeak rather than vice versa.
>>1167147
Yes that's what I assume, thanks for pointing it out.
>>1167131
>What we call communism is what you sub 90 IQ retards call socialism
Actually, sorry to rain on your rage parade capitalcuck, but Communist and Socialist societies are actually the same thing. :)
>>1167192
t. commie
Your opinion is not valid.
>>1167206
Not an argument ;)
>>1167221
t. Stefan Commienoux
>>1160310
>not to be trusted with the idea of basic human dignities
bull shit double standard argument...the tsars were not nobel enlightened rulers, western european nations were guilty of collonial brutalism....this wasnt about human dignity....it was about killing an idea that they saw as dangerous becuase if sucessful it threatened their social order
>>1160310
>Why do you think Communism could never get a solid foothold west of Russia without overwhelming Soviet military presence after ww2?
becuase america, britan, and nato worked very hard to undermine,sabatoge,isolate,encircle, etc the ussr...and any third world nation that went commie was invaded, overthrown, had coups organized and funded and pro western dictators put in place
>>1167505
>is the west's fault
daily reminder communism failed whilst capitalism carries on.
>>1167595
we dindu nuffin it's always someone elses fault
>>1167595
the west certainly helped, to deny that and suggest that soviet failure was purely internal is naive
>>1167497
>colonial brutalism
How brutalized was your colon when you posted this shit?
>>1167505
>country and satellite states with an ideology bent on spreading itself all around the world in spite of established governments and opposing ideologies there
>anything but isolated
lol
they isolated themselves
they encircled themselves
>>1167603
Communism isn't a force in direct opposition to capitalism, it's simply the evolution of it.
>>1167816
>muh real gommunism neber been tried
>>1167093
>>If being irrelevant means defeating Nazi Germany
Wouldn't have done shit against them if America and Britain weren't in the war as well and those two powers were more then capable of smacking down the nazis without you anyway.
>>space program
Dwarfed by the US counterpart and plagued by catastrophe after catastrophe
>>making the entire western world shit their pants continuously over the course of 45 years from the threat of nuclear annihilation then I'm all for it!making the entire western world shit their pants continuously over the course of 45 years from the threat of nuclear annihilation then I'm all for it!
>>being in favor of threatening the world with death by nuclear fire or enslavement
You're a thug and a monster. Good day.
>>1157901
Because her father executed thousands of children
>>1160310
>Why do you think Communism could never get a solid foothold west of Russia without overwhelming Soviet military presence after ww2?
Certainly not because of a few dead nobles.
>>1167983
So? Collective punishment is barbarism.
>>1167983
Her father not her you cuckoo
>>1167955
>catastrophe after catastrophe
This isn't actually true.
The US space program has a record of fatalities that make the Soviets look like paragons of safety regulations.
Nor is it true it was dwarfed by the US counterpart, both made great accomplishments in space travel and there's no point in trying to marginalize the achievements of one for the sake of nationalist dick swinging.
>and those two powers were more then capable of smacking down the nazis without you anyway.
That probably isn't true.
>>>being in favor of threatening the world with death by nuclear fire or enslavement
The soviets wanted peace, it was the western powers that were willing to annihilate all life on Earth for the sake of protecting the bourgeoisie from communism.
>>1167852
I did not say anything of the sort.
Although communism as the state of being as never been implemented for the fact that it isn't attainable just yet. What we've seen are crude forms of socialism.
>>1168067
>tfw I had to read this shit until the last sentence to realize it's bait
>>1168078
Ok, remind me which side of the allies was considering re-arming the Germans to immediately start waging war on the other?
>>1159731
What this gentleman meant.
>>1167117
>Mongol
Lasted for 100+ years, had a major impact on the development of China, and was followed by numerous successor steppe empires like the Golden Horde, the Timurids, etc.
>Napoleonic Empires
Completely changed European geopolitics, began the waterfall of numerous liberal and nationalist revolutions, and created and spread many of the standards used in Europe and much of the rest of the world today, such as the metric system.
What lasting achievements did the Soviet Union have besides making Eastern Europe and Central Asia even more of a shithole than it already was?
>>1168111
Completely changed global geopolitics, signalled the beginning of major communist revolutions and was a colossus of science and engineering including being the pioneers of space travel.
>>1160132
>You can actually criticise the third reich on /pol/ and get some answers other than deflection from some.
Because most of /pol/ isn't nazis, they're alt-right. For a better example. make a post criticizing Trump and watch how quickly you get spammed with "cuck", "sjw", "reddit", etc.
>>1167603
Real capitalism isn't happening. Crony capitalism is. Enron capitalism. Adam Smith would roll around in his grave.
Why were Russian soldiers so easily persuaded?
>guys we're doing gommunism now OK pls mutiny
>yes lenin
/thread
Yes.
Killing cute bourgeois girls is the best thing ever.
>>1168067
Blatant bait 0/10.
>>1168067
>The soviets wanted peace
even more blatant and baity and no I don't give a fuck that baity isn't an actual word in this context.
>>1168086
Neither because a new war right after ww2 was in nobodies interest at that time.
Inb4 various plans were drawn up or someshit. The US had a plan drawn up to invade canada, that doesn't mean we actually seriously were going to do that.
>>1168731
>be garrisoned in a city with hundreds of thousands of your countrymen who begin starving
>riots in the streets
>the people of your country are being machine gunned in the streets by their own police
>be ordered to do the same
Not that complicated.
>>1168731
The alternative to Gommies was return to fight in a useless war for god knows whos fucking interests at this point.
All fucking commies must fucking hang.
>>1158135
I'm not reading all of that, but several of the worst ones were caused by unusual weather conditions. You can blame the Brits for the Great Bengal famine, and maybe a few others, but most of those deaths probably would have occurred without British rule. Occasionally mismanaging things in a way that results in death over a period of several hundred years is nowhere near as reprehensible as intentionally killing millions over the span of twenty years.
Nicky totally deserved it but killing random people from his family was a bit overkill here.
