The double standards in terms of how Communist regimes are seen versus other totalitarian regimes

[Tooting Carmen]

Am I the only one who has noticed this? There are many people not just on the far Left, but even quite centrist, moderate people who argue that the main problem with the USSR, pre-1980s China, Eastern Europe, the Khmer Rouge etc. is that they "didn't really practice Communism". By contrast, nobody remotely sane and normal would argue that the main problem with South Africa was that they "didn't really practice Apartheid", or that Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy "didn't really practice Fascism", or that the current Saudi and Iranian regimes "don't really practice Islam". (Actually, perhaps people like Bin Laden and al-Zarqawi might argue that, but nobody remotely in the realm of reality would). What explains this dissonance? Why are Communist regimes seen as problematic, cruel and despotic in spite of their guiding ideologies, whereas other totalitarian regimes are (correctly) seen as problematic, cruel and despotic because of their guiding ideologies?

[Red Pill]

That is a very interesting question. Actually one could say that there is some value in the argument that many of these regimes (apart from Nazi Germany and maybe some other) didn't really practice their doctrine. For instance, Communism should lead to a society where 'everybody contributes according to their abilities and receives according to their needs'. Not bad on paper, but far from what it happened in reality. The Jim Crow system was, in theory, based on the principle of 'separate but equal' but in reality it was 'separate and unequal'. Fact is that in the real world he who is in a position of absolute strength, whether it is a single party like the Communists in the USSR, or a race like Whites in the old South, tends to use it to its own advantage.

But why are communist regimes usually judged less harshly than fascist ones, despite some of them resulted in genocidal policies? Probably because Communists can claim that they strive for social justice and the rights of the oppressed, while fascist ideologies, particularly national socialism, tended to promote a kind of social/ethnic Darwinism where the 'inferior' (whether it is a race, nation or other category of people) is fair game and not deserving the universal basic rights that, at least on paper, are today accorded to every human being. Fascists historically tended also to see war as a regenerative, positive process. Thus in general Communists tend to be seen as misguided utopists while Fascists are seen as bloodthirsty haters.

Regarding Islamists, it is a common thesis today, at least in Cultural Marxist circles, that fundamentalists and terrorists don't follow real Islam, and to state otherwise is often described as Islamophobia.

[Red Pill]

There is another factor too. Communism is based on an economic model that is basically dead. And not likely to be resurrected. Other ideologies are based on things like ethnicity, nationalism and religion. And these things aren't dead, bc they have deep cultural and psychological roots. So those ideologies are still seen as an actual threat. Communists (the real ones I mean, not today's Cultural Marxists) are like T-rex. Frightening maybe, but long gone.

[The Blade]

I hate communist ideology, especially in the form practiced by USSR.
I despise most traits of nazism, too.
I do praise a lot of features of Italian fascism, on the other hand.

[Tooting Carmen]

I hate communist ideology, especially in the form practiced by USSR.
I despise most traits of nazism, too.
I do praise a lot of features of Italian fascism, on the other hand.

Italian fascism was not actually that brutal compared to quite a few other dictatorships, only that it got tainted mainly because Mussolini eventually aligned himself with Hitler. All the same, what do you find so praiseworthy about Italian fascism though?

[The Blade]

Italian fascism was not actually that brutal compared to quite a few other dictatorships, only that it got tainted mainly because Mussolini eventually aligned himself with Hitler. All the same, what do you find so praiseworthy about Italian fascism though?

It put Italy on its feet economically in a time of need. Church and state interfered (ironically) less in each other's deeds than it is nowadays even in some democratic countries (what left for comparing to the USSR). Family values were promoted. Back in Mussolini's Italy being masculine was treated as something good, while in nowadays liberal and feminist dominated societies it's seen as a ''flaw'' or even worse - a ''sin''. Also, the state controlled important entities such as healthcare which is, in my opinion, the better variant.

[RN97]

Italian fascism was not actually that brutal compared to quite a few other dictatorships, only that it got tainted mainly because Mussolini eventually aligned himself with Hitler. All the same, what do you find so praiseworthy about Italian fascism though?

What dictatorships are there to compare them too? It was quite brutal from the start towards their political enemies, especially communists. This is why a lot of people from the ruling class, like the king, anointed Mussolini as the savior of Italy from communism. Mussolini was also anti-semitic before Hitler influenced him to do anything, he was just not as extreme before;

If Petrograd (Pietrograd) does not yet fall, if [General] Denikin is not moving forward, then this is what the great Jewish bankers of London and New York have decreed. These bankers are bound by ties of blood to those Jews who in Moscow as in Budapest are taking their revenge on the Aryan race that has condemned them to dispersion for so many centuries. In Russia, 80 percent of the managers of the Soviets are Jews, in Budapest 17 out of 22 people's commissars are Jews. Might it not be that bolshevism is the vendetta of Judaism against Christianity?? It is certainly worth pondering. It is entirely possible that bolshevism will drown in the blood of a pogrom of catastrophic proportions. World finance is in the hands of the Jews. Whoever owns the strongboxes of the peoples is in control of their political systems. Behind the puppets (making peace) in Paris, there are the Rothschilds, the Warburgs, the Schiffs, the Guggenheims who are of the same blood who are conquering Petrograd and Budapest. Race does not betray race. [...] Bolshevism is a defense of the international plutocracy. This is the basic truth of the matter. The international plutocracy dominated and controlled by Jews has a supreme interest in all of Russian life accelerating its process of disintegration to the point of paroxysm. A Russia that is paralyzed, disorganized, starved, will be a place where tomorrow the bourgeoisie, yes the bourgeoisie, o proletarians will celebrate its spectacular feast of plenty.

— Benito Mussolini, Il Popolo d'Italia, June 1919
He condemned Bolsheviks for conspiring with Jewish bankers and Jewish finance capitalists whilst he had the support of a lot of Italian capitalists and big land-owners. No matter what you think, Mussolini was indeed anti-semitic, in bed with the Italian ruling class and a imperialists who had no problem with political violence. He regularly used torture and even made his enemies shit themselves to death:
https://www.history101.com/mussolini...nk-castor-oil/

[RN97]

Most people who criticize communism has never even touched any piece of marxist literature and this included me a few years back. They have no clue about key marxist concepts such as historical materialism, surplus value, commodities, private property, socialism and communism. I suggest you read Marx as it's interesting and a valuable lesson to learn. I think that plenty of marxist-leninist communists proclaim all the rulers you listed to be actual Marxists (marxist-Leninist that is), expect for the Khmer Rouge since it turned more nationalists and didn't have much to do with Marxism and it was even supported by capitalists. You see, Marx was not a ruler, nor did he really write anything that can be considered inherently oppressive or bad, unless you're a capitalist (actual capitalist, not a capitalism-advocate). Hitler and Mussolini were political ideologues and rulers so it's a bit different. Fascism was originated and tried out by the same people, whilst communism not.

[Tooting Carmen]

What dictatorships are there to compare them too? It was quite brutal from the start towards their political enemies, especially communists. This is why a lot of people from the ruling class, like the king, anointed Mussolini as the savior of Italy from communism. Mussolini was also anti-semitic before Hitler influenced him to do anything, he was just not as extreme before;

If Petrograd (Pietrograd) does not yet fall, if [General] Denikin is not moving forward, then this is what the great Jewish bankers of London and New York have decreed. These bankers are bound by ties of blood to those Jews who in Moscow as in Budapest are taking their revenge on the Aryan race that has condemned them to dispersion for so many centuries. In Russia, 80 percent of the managers of the Soviets are Jews, in Budapest 17 out of 22 people's commissars are Jews. Might it not be that bolshevism is the vendetta of Judaism against Christianity?? It is certainly worth pondering. It is entirely possible that bolshevism will drown in the blood of a pogrom of catastrophic proportions. World finance is in the hands of the Jews. Whoever owns the strongboxes of the peoples is in control of their political systems. Behind the puppets (making peace) in Paris, there are the Rothschilds, the Warburgs, the Schiffs, the Guggenheims who are of the same blood who are conquering Petrograd and Budapest. Race does not betray race. [...] Bolshevism is a defense of the international plutocracy. This is the basic truth of the matter. The international plutocracy dominated and controlled by Jews has a supreme interest in all of Russian life accelerating its process of disintegration to the point of paroxysm. A Russia that is paralyzed, disorganized, starved, will be a place where tomorrow the bourgeoisie, yes the bourgeoisie, o proletarians will celebrate its spectacular feast of plenty.

— Benito Mussolini, Il Popolo d'Italia, June 1919
He condemned Bolsheviks for conspiring with Jewish bankers and Jewish finance capitalists whilst he had the support of a lot of Italian capitalists and big land-owners. No matter what you think, Mussolini was indeed anti-semitic, in bed with the Italian ruling class and a imperialists who had no problem with political violence. He regularly used torture and even made his enemies shit themselves to death:
https://www.history101.com/mussolini...nk-castor-oil/

No of course Mussolini was no saint, just saying he wasn't AS brutal as the Nazis, the Falangists, various Communist regimes or even Third World dictators like Suharto or Idi Amin. And he was perfectly happy having Jews in the Italian Fascist Party - at one point they made up fully ONE THIRD of the party's membership, up to and including his mistress and his Foreign Minister as late as 1939. The anti-Semitic laws he eventually did introduce were mostly to appease Hitler. For the most part, his conception of Italy as a nation was not racialised in quite the same way the Nazis viewed the German nation.

[Tooting Carmen]

Most people who criticize communism has never even touched any piece of marxist literature and this included me a few years back. They have no clue about key marxist concepts such as historical materialism, surplus value, commodities, private property, socialism and communism. I suggest you read Marx as it's interesting and a valuable lesson to learn. I think that plenty of marxist-leninist communists proclaim all the rulers you listed to be actual Marxists (marxist-Leninist that is), expect for the Khmer Rouge since it turned more nationalists and didn't have much to do with Marxism and it was even supported by capitalists. You see, Marx was not a ruler, nor did he really write anything that can be considered inherently oppressive or bad, unless you're a capitalist (actual capitalist, not a capitalism-advocate). Hitler and Mussolini were political ideologues and rulers so it's a bit different. Fascism was originated and tried out by the same people, whilst communism not.

Marxism from the start always had the seeds of totalitarianism in it - its bloodcurdling class-based hatreds, its belief in the all-encompassing State and command economy, its social and historical determinism.