I'm not saying they were saints but they were on the same moral plane of the Allies, wishing to set up buffer states instead of absorbing them fully into the USSR. Political repression was a real issue in the eastern bloc countries but it's no where near as bad as what the US, France, or UK did in the post war period with their colonies, segregation, bombings, or coups.
You’re thinking about USSR of 1980s when political repression and some hair cutting was the main issue. But USSR up to mid 1950s was a tad more evil to say the least.
And „debunking double genocide theory“ is fighting a strawman. Let’s talk how USSR started WW2 along with Nazis. Let’s talk Katyn or Rainiai. Let’s talk gulags. Stalin’s purges. Early USSR social reforms and consequences.
As bad as the Nazis were, the British were much much worse both in both body count and the cruel tactics they used to kill people. They killed natives all over the world. They killed more Indians (than the 6 million Nazi figures) in WW2 period alone. That's just from one country.
French and the rest of the allies were as bad in methodology and cruelty - though not as bad in body count. Everything that Nazis has done, the allies has done an order of magnitude more to non whites.
The notion that Allies were good guys is just pure white supremacy - that non white causalities don't count.
Also, I don't quite get you? are you calling me a Nazi? Is that a compliment given your previous far-right rhetoric? I'm sorry you seem to be sending some mixed signals...
The Allies.
The Nazis, the ones committing genocide, they are the bad guys.
> The notion that Allies were good guys is just pure white supremacy - that non white causalities don't count.
The notion that the Allies were the good guys in WW2 is not white supremacy. The fact that the Allied countries did bad things outside WW2 does not mean they were not the good guys during WW2.
Are you seriously trying to tell me the Nazis/Axis powers where the good guys in WW2?.
> The Nazis, the ones committing genocide, they are the bad guys.
Except, the allies killed way more people. They just happened to be non white. You are a white supremacist for downplaying it - essentially saying those genocides don't matter as it happened to brown and black people.
>Are you seriously trying to tell me the Nazis/Axis powers where the good guys in WW2?.
Do you have some serious reading comprehension problems? I am saying both are bad. If you just look at the ww2 alone, then Nazis were bad, but if you look at everything that was happening around the world, then the allies were much much worse. As bad as Nazis were, the Allies were much much worse.
For the record, i responded your question almost instantly and HN didn't let me post. Got an error saying i am typing too fast.
The Soviets were pretty bad. Allying with the Nazis against the Soviets would have been less wrong.
The Nazis on the other-hand generally just murdered everyone they hated (losing all of your property + 10 years in the gulag wasn't really an option if you were a Jew in eastern Europe...).
Did they?
Yes, the allied powers during the war were far from perfect (excluding from this the murderous USSR), but to say they were comparable to the Nazis is grotesquely absurd and shows a breathtaking lack of perspective or deliberate mendacity about motives and outcomes..
Ah yes, ignorance and white supremacist history is total bliss. Just because you think you are a hero doesn't mean you are one.
The British caused famines during WW2 alone killed millions in India (estimates go from 1 to 6 million). That's just the famines.
As for the rest of the total figures of british raj casualty - the estimates go from 100 to 200 million. Literally the very first link on google search i am pasting below:
https://mronline.org/2022/12/14/british-empire-killed-165-mi...
Anyone who thinks Allies were the "good guys" are white supremacists who thinks black and brown dead figures and cruelty towards them just don't matter. I want to know how brits who killed hundreds of millions of people worldwide are the good guys.
Also worth noting that your book's highly debatable assertions cover a span of time stretching across 40 years and ending 20 years before the second world war even began. Compare these tenous arguments to the Nazis's well documented, direct responsibility for over 21 million deaths (including the 11 million killed in specific, targeted extermination campaigns), in just 5 years. Thus even if the book you reference were completely accurate, it would make the Nazis worse during the relevant time span.
None of these arguments have anything to do with me being a white supremacist. And idiotic ideological label now commonly assigned to anyone for absurd reasons because they don't agree with very specific agendas.
Your apparent overall spin on this strongly reminds of a general tendency among some people today to do everything possible to paint the western countries as the most terrible no matter the logical costs or the contortions of whataboutism that this involves. It's an old line of "reasoning" but one that has found fresh material with people making completely ridiculous arguments in defense of policies by countries like Russia and China, specifically because it means shitting on the west.
This war is as clear as WW2 if you don’t see that then I don’t know what to say, it’s plain as day to most people.