• Lols [they/them]@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          saying that someone who recriminalised homosexuality did nothing wrong ‘because he improved the general quality of life’ sounds suspiciously like queer folk just being the cost of doing business

          • RollaD20 [comrade/them, any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            15
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yes Stalin was homophobic. He deserves criticism for this. Welcome to most people and countries (especially the Christian ones). I find it incredible that despite the fucking travesty that is the quality of life for queer folk in the USA, especially for black; indigenous; non-white peoples, certain folk have the gall to look back at a man born over 100 years ago, son to a poor family in a nation under the boot of Russian Empire and criticize him for not having perfect values when the common narrative of him as a monster is disrupted. Of course he wasn’t perfect, of course he deserves criticism where criticism is due. However, there are a significant set of actions which deserve praise, especially relative to his common depiction.

            That being said, it’s not as if socialist governments that do well when it comes to queer rights are lauded for their efforts. The DDR made significant strides for the queer community yet is rarely (if ever) applauded in the west for this. Cuba still manages to get attacked on this front despite having the most progressive stance on the matter today. This criticism in this context never feels in good faith, it feels desperate and reaching for a way to conflate socialists and fascists.

            • Lols [they/them]@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Welcome to most people and countries (especially the Christian ones).|

              I find it incredible that despite the fucking travesty that is the quality of life for queer folk in the USA

              i wasn’t comparing stalins policies to other countries, people or the USA, i was commenting on ‘stalin did nothing wrong’

              certain folk have the gall to look back at a man born over 100 years ago, son to a poor family in a nation under the boot of Russian Empire and criticize him for not having perfect values when the common narrative of him as a monster is disrupted

              i wasnt commenting on him not being a monster, i was commenting on ‘stalin did nothing wrong’

              That being said, it’s not as if socialist governments that do well when it comes to queer rights are lauded for their efforts. The DDR made significant strides for the queer community yet is rarely (if ever) applauded in the west for this. Cuba still manages to get attacked on this front despite having the most progressive stance on the matter today. This criticism in this context never feels in good faith, it feels desperate and reaching for a way to conflate socialists and fascists.

              i wasnt commenting on socialists or their policies, i was commenting on ‘stalin did nothing wrong’

          • Rod_Blagojevic [none/use name]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            That is true, but I still like it as a retort to lib criticism of Stalin that almost always involves something that didn’t really happen anyway. As far as Stalin being homophobic, I don’t know anything about it, but I do know that he knew that the false scarcity and false precariousness created by his capitalist and feudal enemies is what causes reactionary thought to flourish.

            • Lols [they/them]@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I still like it as a retort to lib criticism of Stalin that almost always involves something that didn’t really happen anyway

              I don’t know anything about it,

              do you reckon that waving criticisms off as ‘almost always involving something that didn’t really happen anyway’ while not knowing anything about whats being criticised is a winning strategy, or that exclusively learning about the wholesome, sanitary parts of a persons actions, statements, ideals and beliefs is a healthy way to approach historical figures

              heres some reading if youre interested, from a source youll probably actually appreciate