与「Soviet」相关的搜索结果

In October 1937, at the height of the Great Terror, Stalin's secret police was shooting roughly 1,500 Soviet citizens every day. That same month, the founders of the London School of Economics published the second edition of their two-volume defense of Stalin's regime, Soviet Communism: A New Civilization. The one thing they changed from the first edition was dropping the question mark. 🧵

“But the Nazis weren’t socialists because they crushed labor unions!” It wasn’t until 1980 that the first independent union was legalized in the Soviet bloc. “Solidarity” in Poland reached 10 million members in a year which was absolutely terrible for the commies. So in 1981, the Communist Party declared martial law. They sent their tanks into the streets, shot protesting miners, and jailed tens of thousands just to keep their grip on Poland. Jaruzelski cut the phones, sealed the borders, banned the union, and imprisoned the their leader Lech Wałęsa for 11 months. 3 days after that, riot police stormed the Wujek mine and killed 9 strikers who refused to accept the crackdown. Internments, censorship, and surveillance continued for years afterward.

The Bolsheviks declared war on the Russian Orthodox Church as soon as they seized power. They stripped it of legal status and property, then executed thousands of priests, monks, and believers in the Red Terror. Metropolitan Vladimir of Kiev was dragged from the Monastery of the Caves, tortured, and shot in January 1918. Patriarch Tikhon publicly excommunicated the Bolshevik leadership and spent his remaining years under arrest until his death in 1925. In 1922, while the country starved, the Soviets seized church gold and jewels under the pretext of famine relief. When believers in Shuya tried to stop them, troops opened fire on the crowd. Lenin then issued a secret memo ordering the most merciless suppression of the clergy possible, arguing conditions would never again be so favorable for crushing the Church’s influence for decades. By year’s end thousands of clergy had been shot and a 1000 year old institution was driven underground by the regime that claimed to liberate the peasants who built it.

Oui, j’en ai lu. Et justement, les livres des années 30 (et ceux écrits par des gens qui vivaient ça) disent exactement le contraire de la doxa d’après-guerre. Le programme de 1920 du NSDAP (points 11 à 17) n’est pas une glose moderne : abolition des revenus non liés au travail, nationalisation des trusts, participation aux bénéfices des grandes entreprises, réforme agraire avec expropriation, lutte contre le « capitalisme financier ». Les nazis le répétaient sans complexe. Hitler lui-même, dans ses discours et conversations privées, parlait de socialisme national et se situait dans la rupture avec le libéralisme économique. L’économie réelle sous le régime ? Contrôle des prix et des salaires (Preisstopp 1936), planification industrielle via le Plan de quatre ans, cartels obligatoires, allocation autoritaire des matières premières, entrepreneurs transformés en *Betriebsführer* qui exécutent les directives de l’État. Propriété privée nominale, pouvoir réel de l’État. Mises l’a décrit en temps réel comme une forme de socialisme (Zwangswirtschaft). Hayek, dans *La Route de la servitude* (1944), y a consacré un chapitre entier : les racines socialistes du nazisme. Avant 1935, le camp marxiste lui-même ne rangeait pas le national-socialisme à « droite ». Il le traitait comme un concurrent socialiste dévoyé. La théorie du « social-fascisme » (Staline/Zinoviev 1924, poussée jusqu’en 1933) assimilait social-démocratie et fascisme. C’est Dimitrov, au VIIe Congrès de l’Internationale communiste en août 1935, qui impose la définition qui va devenir canonique : « dictature terroriste des éléments les plus réactionnaires du capital financier ». Opération de branding pure. Il fallait monopoliser le mot socialisme et coller l’étiquette capitaliste à tout rival. Après 1945, les vainqueurs soviétiques ont imposé leur version. Les manuels occidentaux ont suivi. Et on a oublié que Mussolini venait du socialisme, que les Strasser et une partie importante du NSDAP se revendiquaient explicitement de la gauche anti-capitaliste, et que l’anticapitalisme racial n’est pas le contraire du collectivisme, c’est une variante. Le point factuel n’est donc pas faux. Il est même banal pour quiconque lit les sources primaires des années 20-30 au lieu des récits post-45. Le vrai clivage n’a jamais été « droite vs gauche » au sens scolaire. C’est contrôle collectif vs liberté individuelle. Une fois qu’on replace le national-socialisme dans la famille des collectivismes, le spectre redevient clair.

On te vend depuis 40 ans que sans « sensibilité de gauche », les gens crèvent de faim. C’est exactement l’inverse de ce que disent les chiffres. 1990 : 2,3 milliards d’êtres humains en pauvreté extrême. 38 % de l’humanité. 2025 : 808 millions. Environ 10 %. 1,5 milliard de personnes sorties de la misère absolue en 35 ans. La plus grande réduction de souffrance humaine de toute l’histoire de l’espèce. Qui a fait ça ? Pas l’aide internationale. Pas les ONG. Pas les programmes de redistribution. Pas la sensibilité de gauche. Le marché. L’ouverture commerciale. La Chine de Deng qui abandonne le maoïsme en 1978. L’Inde qui libéralise en 1991. Le Vietnam, l’Indonésie, le Bangladesh qui s’ouvrent au capitalisme. Les seuls endroits où l’extrême pauvreté a explosé sur la même période ? Le Venezuela socialiste (de 27 % à plus de 80 % en dix ans, inflation à 130 000 %, un Vénézuélien moyen qui a perdu 11 kilos). La Corée du Nord. Cuba. Le Zimbabwe de Mugabe. La gauche ne nourrit pas les pauvres. Elle les fabrique. Le capitalisme produit tellement de richesse que même ses « perdants » américains vivent mieux que la classe moyenne soviétique. Un pauvre américain a un frigo, une voiture, un téléphone, la clim et internet. Un pauvre cubain attend du riz. Et le « social américain est un désastre » reste une légende française. PIB par habitant US : 80 000 $. France : 45 000 $. Un Mississippien (l’État le plus pauvre des États-Unis) a un revenu médian supérieur au Français moyen. Dans un système libéral, il y a plus de richesse créée, plus largement distribuée, et beaucoup moins de pauvres. Partout. Sans exception. Sur toutes les périodes mesurées. Être de gauche en 2026 face à ces données, ce n’est plus de la sensibilité. C’est préférer la posture morale aux résultats. La compassion sans résultats, ça s’appelle de la vanité.

📍World Political Party Representatives Visit Ruijin: After Reading Books on Chinese Soviet History, They Finally Touch the "Roots of Development" #Soviet# #China# #Ruijin# #CPC# @AmbXieFeng @SpoxCHN_LinJian @xuejianosaka @salahzhang @zhang_heqing @consulat_de @ChenPingMFA

Breaking: Are we on the BRINK of NUCLEAR WAR? The Cold War taught us that NUCLEAR competition between superpowers requires constant communication, agreed-upon limits, and mutual understanding of the catastrophic cost of escalation. For decades after the Soviet Union collapsed, we thought those lessons were permanently etched into strategic doctrine. Today, we face a situation that echoes the 1960s in every significant way. Nine (9) nations now possess NUCLEAR weapons. There is no shared understanding of escalation thresholds. The frameworks that prevented NUCLEAR WAR have been dismantled, and no one has built replacements. We are reliving the most dangerous period in human history, but this time with more NUCLEAR powers and less experience. Read my comprehensive assessment of the current strategic environment and what American leadership must do. Link in comments.

In 2014, 300 scientists warned Anthony Fauci would start a global pandemic. Following the high-profile escape of three bugs from U.S. labs, these 300 scientists sent a letter to President Obama, urging him to shut down Anthony Fauci's gain-of-function research. Obama issued a moratorium and shut down 18 of the worst projects by Anthony Fauci. In the end, he really didn't shut them down. Instead, Obama moved the research offshore to places like Ukraine, the former Soviet State of Georgia, and the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China. Now, it is widely accepted that COVID-19 originated from that very lab in Wuhan, China. Those 300 scientists were right about Fauci… But the big question is, why are people like him so obsessed with creating dangerous pathogens in the first place? 🧵

What the West Still Doesn’t Get It: Communism’s True Core: The Systemic Lie Most people in the West think they understand communism. They picture bread lines, gulags, failed five-year plans, and the collapsed Soviet Union. They treat it as a discredited economic theory – an experiment that proved that abolishing private property doesn’t work. Case closed, history moved on. This misunderstanding may be the most dangerous intellectual failure of our time. Communism was never primarily an economic system. Economics was the surface. Beneath it lay something far more insidious: a total, systemic, institutionalized commitment to lying. Not occasional dishonesty. Not spin or propaganda in the ordinary sense. Something deeper – a civilizational war against truth itself, waged through every institution, every classroom, every newspaper, every conversation, until reality itself became negotiable and the lie became the air people breathed. The Words We’re Missing The Polish language, forged by decades of living under this system, produced words for this phenomenon that English simply cannot match: Zakłamanie [zah-kwah-MAH-nyeh] – a state of total, pervasive, socially embedded falsehood, a condition in which an entire society is saturated with lies so thoroughly that truth becomes almost inaccessible. Obłuda [ob-woo-dah] – a deep, performative hypocrisy, the gap between what is proclaimed and what is actually practiced, the mask worn so long it begins to feel like a face. These are not words for individual liars. They describe a system – a mode of social organization built on organized mendacity, where the lie is not the exception but the foundation. English has no single word for either concept, and that linguistic gap is not a coincidence. It reflects a gap in experience. Cultures that did not live under communism lack the vocabulary because they lack the wound. And because they lack the vocabulary, they struggle to recognize the thing when it reappears in new clothing. The Continuity: Communism, Leftism, Wokeism What we call wokeism today, or the broader radical left, is not a new phenomenon. It is the same operating system running on updated hardware. The specifics have changed – instead of the proletariat, we have marginalized identity groups; instead of bourgeois class enemies, we have racists and transphobes; instead of socialist realism, we have DEI statements. But the deep structure is the same. That deep structure is this: truth is not discovered, it is assigned. Reality is not something to be understood honestly but something to be narrated strategically. Language is not a tool for communication but a weapon of power. And anyone who resists the approved narrative is not simply wrong – they are dangerous, and must be silenced, shamed, or destroyed. This is zakłamanie in its modern form. This is obłuda wearing a human rights badge. The same movement that insists men can become women will insist, with equal fervor, that questioning this is an act of violence. The same institutions that claim to champion free inquiry systematically suppress dissent. The same people who invoke tolerance as their highest value are among the most intolerant forces in public life. The contradiction is not accidental – it is structural. It is the system working as designed. Why the West Still Doesn’t Get It People who grew up in freedom tend to assume, at some level, that bad actors know they are lying. That somewhere behind the ideological performance, there is a cynical operator who privately acknowledges reality. This assumption is wrong, and it is why Westerners consistently underestimate what they are dealing with. The totalitarian lie, at its mature stage, is not cynical. It is believed. Or rather, it creates a condition in which the distinction between belief and performance collapses entirely. People learn to say things they do not believe so fluently, and for so long, that they lose access to what they actually think. 1/2

Putin's mother won a car in a lottery. His family had to choose: sell it for an apartment, or keep it so he could get to university. They stayed in their one-room communal apartment. She chose her son's future. That's who Putin came from. Putin's mother worked as a hospital janitor after retiring. One day at the cafeteria, they gave her a lottery ticket as change. She won a car, a Zaporozhets. The most basic car you could get in the Soviet Union. The family lived in one room which was so called ommunal apartment with shared kitchen, shared bathroom with other families. Putin had just started university. They sat down to decide what to do. Sell the ticket and buy a cooperative apartment, or keep the car. Putin was sure they'd sell it. Getting out of that single room was the obvious choice for a family living on almost nothing. His mother said: We'll take the car. Let our son drive it. They stayed in that one room so he could have transportation to university. That's who Putin came from. Trump's father was a real estate mogul worth hundreds of millions. Trump grew up in a 23-room mansion, private schools, a reported $413 million inheritance. His first ventures funded with his father's money. He was born into an empire. Americans love to talk about rejecting kings. No monarchy, no aristocracy. But the self-made man is the American Dream. Then they elect someone born into dynastic wealth who lives in a gold-plated penthouse and puts his kids in government positions. And call the guy whose mom worked as a janitor a dictator. But it turns out Putin is the ultimate American Dream story: a self-made man who rose from an ordinary family to become a representative of his people and the leader of his country.