We demand general elections by universal, secret ballot are held throughout the country to elect a new National Assembly, with all political parties participating. We demand that the right of workers to strike be recognised.

We demand complete revision of the norms operating in industry and an immediate and radical adjustment of salaries in accordance with the just requirements of workers and intellectuals. We demand a minimum living wage for workers.

So you're saying the revolution demanding minimum wage and the right to strike wasn't a worker's revolution? Are all tankies this right-wing or just you?

[–] AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml 18 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

What do you think "all political parties participating" means in 1956 Hungary?

[+] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz -16 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

One of the biggest and most dangerous mistakes made by Communists is the idea that a revolution can be made by revolutionaries alone. On the contrary, to be successful, all serious revolutionary work requires that the idea that revolutionaries are capable of playing the part only of the vanguard of the truly virile and advanced class must be understood and translated into action.

- Lenin, 1922

It probably means they read Lenin and liked his ideas a lot better than Stalin's nonsense. Now, you were explaining how tankies oppose minimum wage and the right to strike?

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

To be clear, drag is calling Nazis and Nazi sympathizers "the advanced working class." Trying to twist Lenin into supporting fascism is incorrect, to say the least.

Moreover, Stalin was dead before 1956, this was Khrushchev.

[+] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz -12 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

There's nothing fascist in the 16 demands, and drag's search for evidence of this chalk thing turned up nothing with the word "chalk" in it -

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 14 points 2 weeks ago

drag asked for sources, was that just to waste my time? Read them. Here's another few excerpts:

Section from the book “The Truth about Hungary” by Herbert Aptheker; a prominent figure in U.S. scholarly discourse in the 1940’s, and Marxist Historian. Written in 1957 it outlined what later would be confirmed by the bourgeois Western press:

"The special correspondent of the Yugoslav paper, Politika, (Nov. 13, 1956) describing the events of those days, said that the homes of Communists were marked with a white cross and those of Jews with a black cross, to serve as signs for the extermination squads. “There is no longer any room for doubt,” said the Yugoslav reporter, “it is an example of classic Hungarian fascism and of White Terror. The information,” continued this writer, "coming from the provinces tells how in certain places Communists were having their eyes put out, their ears cut off, and that they were being killed in the most terrible ways."

"But the forces of reaction were rapidly consolidating their power and pushing forward on the top levels, while in the streets the blood of scores of massacred Communists, Jews, and progressives was flowing."

"Some of the reports reaching Warsaw from Budapest today caused considerable concern. These reports told of massacres of Communists and Jews by what were described as 'Fascist elements' ...." (N.Y. Times, Nov. 1. 1956)

"The evidence is conclusive that the entry of Soviet troops into Budapest stopped the execution of scores, perhaps thousands of Jews, for by the end of October and early November, anti-Semtic pogroms - hallmark of unbridled fascistic terror - were making their appearance, after an absence of some ten years, within Hungary."

"A correspondent of the Israeli newspaper Maariv (Tel Aviv) reported:

During the uprising a number of former Nazis were released from prison and other former Nazis came to Hungary from Salzburg . . . I met them at the border . . . I saw anti-Semitic posters in Budapest . . . On the walls, street lights, streetcars, you saw inscriptions reading: “Down with Jew Gero!” “Down with Jew Rakosi!” or just simply “down with the Jews!”

Leading rabbinical circles in New York received a cable early in November from corresponding circles in Vienna that “Jewish blood is being shed by the rebels in Hungary.” Very much later-in February, 1957-the World Jewish Congress reported that “anti-Semitic excesses occurred in more than twenty villages and smaller provincial towns during the October-November revolt.” This occurred, according to this very conservative body, because “fascist and anti-Semitic groups had apparently seized the opportunity, presented by the absence of a central authority, to come to the surface.” Many among the Jewish refugees from Hungary, the report continued, had fled from this anti-Semitic pogrom-like atmosphere (N.Y. Times, Feb. 15, 1957). This confirmed the earlier report made by the British Rabbi, R. Pozner, who, after touring refugee camps, declared that “the majority of Jews who left Hungary did so for fear of the Hungarians and not the Russians.” The Paris Jewish newspaper, Naye Presse, asserted that Jewish refugees in France claimed quite generally that Soviet soldiers had saved their lives."

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

drag does realize that the Hungarian counter-revolutionaries were working with literal Nazis, and were marking the doors of Jews and Communists, right? They were lynching people, and even freed Nazis from jail to help with the lynching. The "political parties" they wanted to be able to participate were not worker parties, but fascist ones.

This is genuinely what liberals often accuse "tankies" of doing: uncritically supporting movements based on nominally being progressive, despite in reality being highly reactionary. Further, Hungary wanted to get out of paying reparations for World War II, that was one of the biggest cruxes of the situation. Who did Hungary fight alongside in WWII, does drag remember?

Spoiler: the Nazis.

[+] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz -13 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Source?

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 17 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

This is a decent overview of the background that led up to the events of 1956, and this is a decent overview of the darker side, where the lynchings happened. Content Warning: lynched corpses. Here is a source on MI6 training and arming the counterrevolutionaries. Those 3 articles give only the briefest overview of the events, but don't do the real buildup to them, their complexities, what the people actually supported, or the real character in any depth. If drag wants to actually take a deep dive, these are additional sources:

The History of the Working Class Movement in Hungary

1956 Counter-Revolution in Hungary

Others can offer more sources.

Overall, when it comes to geopolitical enemies of the United States in particular, it would not be a bad idea to treat drag's current understanding with extreme skepticism until drag has investigated counter-sources as well. That doesn't mean the US always lies, in fact it frequently tells mostly the truth, but will distory either the quality or quantity of an event.

[+] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz -17 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

If they were capitalists, why didn't the demands of the student protesters say anything about capitalism? If the USSR allowed workers the right to strike, why were the students demanding it?

[–] AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 weeks ago

You asked for sources and then you ignored them in favor of your "um actually" debate pervert bullshit. You're a deeply unserious person.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 weeks ago

Read the sources drag asked for. What this was was a bourgeois supported counter-revolution that armed fascists that were doing pograms. The legitimacy of the demands immediately comes into question when drag understands that these were Nazi sympathizers. They wanted to allow fascist and Capitalist parties to dominate Hungary and wanted to get out of paying reparations for the damage they did as Nazis during World War II.

As for striking, it happened sometimes in the Soviet Union. Worker rights were much better there than in Western countries so it wasn't as common.

[–] hamid@vegantheoryclub.org 20 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

What the hell you talking about? These are all revolutionary heroes acting in self defense and promoting solidarity.

Calling Fanon a tankie is the most ridiculous thing I've read today. Try reading a book for once in your life. He talks about how violence psychologically harms the revolutionary more than it does the people they attack.

Malcolm X was protecting himself after being firebombed here.

Fred Hampton was a socialist and preached cross racial solidarity and black power as a way of elevating black people into solidarity.

The Zapatistas are indigenous heroes who are resisting oppression of the state, who prefer civil disobedience but will act to protect themselves.

Sacco and Vanzetti were organizing a general strike and were framed then murdered by the state

Leila Khalid was separated from her family at 15 during the Palestinian expulsion and resisting Israeli occupation

Where the hell are the tankies in this pic? What are you people even talking about

[+] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz -21 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Drag didn't accuse anyone in the picture of being a tankie. Drag thought the image was relevant to the discussion. As you can see in this thread, users of this community are defending the use of tanks to suppress the 1956 Hungarian revolution. Drag thought that tankies might like to comment on your meme, and called them tankies. And as everyone can see, drag was right.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

drag is defending a fascist counter-revolution, and refused to read sources after asking for them. drag wasn't right about anything. You are defending people that lynched and massacred Jewish people and Communists.

"The special correspondent of the Yugoslav paper, Politika, (Nov. 13, 1956) describing the events of those days, said that the homes of Communists were marked with a white cross and those of Jews with a black cross, to serve as signs for the extermination squads. “There is no longer any room for doubt,” said the Yugoslav reporter, “it is an example of classic Hungarian fascism and of White Terror. The information,” continued this writer, "coming from the provinces tells how in certain places Communists were having their eyes put out, their ears cut off, and that they were being killed in the most terrible ways."

"But the forces of reaction were rapidly consolidating their power and pushing forward on the top levels, while in the streets the blood of scores of massacred Communists, Jews, and progressives was flowing."

"Some of the reports reaching Warsaw from Budapest today caused considerable concern. These reports told of massacres of Communists and Jews by what were described as 'Fascist elements' ...." (N.Y. Times, Nov. 1. 1956)

"The evidence is conclusive that the entry of Soviet troops into Budapest stopped the execution of scores, perhaps thousands of Jews, for by the end of October and early November, anti-Semtic pogroms - hallmark of unbridled fascistic terror - were making their appearance, after an absence of some ten years, within Hungary."

"A correspondent of the Israeli newspaper Maariv (Tel Aviv) reported:

During the uprising a number of former Nazis were released from prison and other former Nazis came to Hungary from Salzburg . . . I met them at the border . . . I saw anti-Semitic posters in Budapest . . . On the walls, street lights, streetcars, you saw inscriptions reading: “Down with Jew Gero!” “Down with Jew Rakosi!” or just simply “down with the Jews!”

Leading rabbinical circles in New York received a cable early in November from corresponding circles in Vienna that “Jewish blood is being shed by the rebels in Hungary.” Very much later-in February, 1957-the World Jewish Congress reported that “anti-Semitic excesses occurred in more than twenty villages and smaller provincial towns during the October-November revolt.” This occurred, according to this very conservative body, because “fascist and anti-Semitic groups had apparently seized the opportunity, presented by the absence of a central authority, to come to the surface.” Many among the Jewish refugees from Hungary, the report continued, had fled from this anti-Semitic pogrom-like atmosphere (N.Y. Times, Feb. 15, 1957). This confirmed the earlier report made by the British Rabbi, R. Pozner, who, after touring refugee camps, declared that “the majority of Jews who left Hungary did so for fear of the Hungarians and not the Russians.” The Paris Jewish newspaper, Naye Presse, asserted that Jewish refugees in France claimed quite generally that Soviet soldiers had saved their lives."

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz -2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Perhaps if the revolutionaries had been allowed to seize the government and impose order, they would have put down the opportunistic fascist movement. Instead, it seems at first glance that the USSR sent their tanks in to cause chaos, created the lawlessness that allowed the fascists to fester, and then took credit for solving the problem they themselves caused.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The fascist movement was the "revolution." If you're saying that the Soviets caused this by beating the Nazis and the Axis powers in World War II, you're siding with the Nazis.

Leading rabbinical circles in New York received a cable early in November from corresponding circles in Vienna that “Jewish blood is being shed by the rebels in Hungary.” Very much later-in February, 1957-the World Jewish Congress reported that “anti-Semitic excesses occurred in more than twenty villages and smaller provincial towns during the October-November revolt.” This occurred, according to this very conservative body, because “fascist and anti-Semitic groups had apparently seized the opportunity, presented by the absence of a central authority, to come to the surface.” Many among the Jewish refugees from Hungary, the report continued, had fled from this anti-Semitic pogrom-like atmosphere (N.Y. Times, Feb. 15, 1957). This confirmed the earlier report made by the British Rabbi, R. Pozner, who, after touring refugee camps, declared that “the majority of Jews who left Hungary did so for fear of the Hungarians and not the Russians.” The Paris Jewish newspaper, Naye Presse, asserted that Jewish refugees in France claimed quite generally that Soviet soldiers had saved their lives."

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Leading rabbinical circles in New York received a cable early in November from corresponding circles in Vienna that “Jewish blood is being shed by the rebels in Hungary.”

That's hearsay.

Very much later-in February, 1957-the World Jewish Congress reported that “anti-Semitic excesses occurred in more than twenty villages and smaller provincial towns during the October-November revolt.” This occurred, according to this very conservative body, because “fascist and anti-Semitic groups had apparently seized the opportunity, presented by the absence of a central authority, to come to the surface.” Many among the Jewish refugees from Hungary, the report continued, had fled from this anti-Semitic pogrom-like atmosphere (N.Y. Times, Feb. 15, 1957). This confirmed the earlier report made by the British Rabbi, R. Pozner, who, after touring refugee camps, declared that “the majority of Jews who left Hungary did so for fear of the Hungarians and not the Russians.” The Paris Jewish newspaper, Naye Presse, asserted that Jewish refugees in France claimed quite generally that Soviet soldiers had saved their lives."

You already posted all of that. Since your memory is struggling, drag will help you by repeating what drag said when you said all that the first time:

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

No, it seems that drag ks working overtime to sympathize with Nazi collaborators upset that they had to pay reparations for the devastation and genocide they contributed to during World War II. These were not "revolutionaries." Hungary had a problem with Nazis since World War II and even before that, to blame the Soviets for Hungarians siding with the Nazis is so utterly confused that it can only be interpreted as deliberate bad-faith.

Genuinely, from me to drag, why does drag do this? Why does drag bat so hard for Nazi collaborators and against Socialists in the real world when it is absolutely clear when the Socialists were in the right?

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Drag is needling you to provide a source that the revolutionaries and the nazis were the same group, or at the very least allied. You've only given one sentence of source, and it's hearsay. Drag wants you to give compelling evidence. Accusations aren't worth anything without strong evidence, so drag is confused why you're wasting time when you could give more sources. Seems like you favour rhetoric and guilt trips over proof.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I've given drag several books and articles, like drag asked. Thanks for confirming for me that you lied about wanting sources and just want to troll, I suppose.

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Drag read the book cover to cover and didn't see anything about the revolutionaries being the same people as the fascists, apart from that one sentence. If you say there's proof in the book, prove it. Drag read it and couldn't find any. Drag is starting to think you're the one who didn't read it.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

"The" book? I linked several. drag is trying to draw a hard demarcation within a group that worked together, I already shared them with drag. Doing a "they weren't Nazis, they just sided with the Nazis against the Socialists" bit to defend pro-fascist, anti-communist murderers is dishonest.

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Drag read the book, and they didn't side with the fascists at all. Read the book, please.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Englighten me, drag. What did the counter-revolutionaries spend their time doing when they weren't working with the Nazis against the Socialists?

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 0 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Maybe you could read the book and find out

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Maybe drag could stop defending Nazi sympathizers that lynched Communists and Jewish people as "revolutionaries." If the Soviets gave power to the Nazi sympathizers, the pograms would have continued. Seems the origin of the Nazi problem was the Nazis, and not the anti-fascist Red Army.

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

How come you think communists are Nazis?

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I think lynching the Communist, Soviet officials and Jewish people is a pretty Nazi thing to do, especially coming from people that sided with the Nazis in World War II and were being made to pay reparations for doing so. drag has no coherent ideology other than getting upset at Communists to the point of defending Nazis.

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

So you're a McCarthyist? You hate communism?

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Not sure how that connects, I support AES and I'm a Marxist-Leninist, the target of McCarthyism. drag calling people lynching the Soviets as "Communists" is very silly, the Communists and peasants in Hungary opposed the Nazis who were lynching Communists and Jewish people.

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The USSR was neoliberal.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Very silly to call a publicly owned and planned economy where the Working Class was in power "neoliberal." Words have meaning because people need to communicate, just calling everything random names doesn't help that.

[–] dragonfucker@lemmy.nz 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It wasn't publicly owned. That requires democracy. The people didn't own the government, and the government owned the means of production, so the people didn't own them. The government was a private entity.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 points 1 week ago

The Soviet Union was democratic. They had a structure called Soviet Democracy, elaborated on in Soviet Democracy, written by Pat Sloan. It looked like this in practice:

The people participated in and owned the government.
The government was not a "private entity," that's deeply silly.

Even if all of what drag said was true, it still would not be neoliberal, itself an ideology surrounding privatization and international Capitalism. drag has been explained all of this before, though, drag is just a Nazi-defending troll, so drag doesn't actually care.