[api]

If you follow that rabbit hole you find that the Nazis had this whole batshit crazy alternative science. It was sort of like Lysenkoism in spirit (an ideologically conforming “alternative truth”) but zanier and wilder. Think hollow Earth and mystical traits of the Aryan race and such.

I heard a historian once describe the SS as “what you would get if you made the Church of Scientology a branch of the military.” The Nazi party was kind of unique in that it was more of a cult with a political party than a simple political party in the classical sense.

I speculate that this is why the Nazis are such a symbol of evil in spite of Stalin having a similar body count. It’s the same reason the Manson murders are creepier than your average serial killing or shoot ‘em up. The culty stuff gives it this extra layer of dark edginess. Stalin just wasn’t as edgelord.

Nazi mysticism and volkisch stuff lives on in the New Age and other areas which is why flipping people in those worlds to Q and other thinly veiled fascist cults was so easy. There’s already a ton of esoteric fascist memes floating around that world.

[unnouinceput]

>in spite of Stalin having a similar body count

Not even close. In the XX century Mao leads generously, followed by Stalin and Hitler is the distant 3rd.

[cmrdporcupine]

That # depends on if you count eastern front WWII casualties (& related civilian deaths via famine etc) in the total, and if you consider them Hitler or Stalin's "fault."

[unnouinceput]

You do know that Stalin lived after 2nd WW almost a decade, yes? And you do know that the entire Eastern Europe was under the heavy boot of red plague, yes? Do you think that "oh, after WW2 Stalin never caused any more deaths, purges, famine, and became such a good boy"?

I suggest you read about communist plagues caused by his regime after WW2, not just before or during.

[cmrdporcupine]

I'm not sure what you're on about, I never implied any of what you just said, and your tone is entirely inappropriate for this forum. I suggest you go read the HN guidelines (again?). This isn't Reddit.

In particular:

"Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith."

and

"When disagreeing, please reply to the argument instead of calling names"

Nothing in my comment said anything about the post-war period or implied any positive interpretation of Stalin or in fact the direction of the totals at all.

I kindly ask that you consider your interactions here more carefully.

[nemo44x]

Maybe he’s upset because you minimized and even tried to blame others for the tyranny that communism has plagued the world with? That you somehow did not consider the decades after the war where communists murdered 10s of millions of innocent people.

I can imagine someone being offended by that in the same way someone making excuses for the nazis would be offensive.

[cmrdporcupine]

I never did either of those things. Not a single word to that effect.

[YeGoblynQueenne]

>> Stalin just wasn’t as edgelord.

Also, he was an ally and posed in historical pictures celebrating history with his good friends, Churchill and Roosevelt. It took a while to overturn good rep like that.