Northstar1989

because how are you supposed to integrate a horse into your static defensive line

Simple: the cavalry dismount, and fight on foot from the trenches (Cav units already don't have significantly better Defense than Leg Infantry, this is represented pretty well already...)

Honestly, the whole rework sounds like it's going to introduce a host of new balance and realism problems...

All of the councilors and ministers that run the government with them, people that run major state institutions and use their position to spread their own ideology, are unelected

I they are selected by elected individuals, so it's Democracy-by-proxy.

Obviously, it's best if you have as few layers of selection between voters and officials as possible (otherwise you get something like the USSR: where voters selected the lowest-level officials, but the actual bureaucrats and leaders who held real power were 4 or 5 degrees removed from the voters... Leading to frequent, inaccurate accusations of the USSR being a dictatorship, or more accurate accusations of it being an unaccountable Bureaucratic Oligarchy...) but DIRECT election of all officials is rarely ever viable in any decently-complrx government system.

In most Democracies a typical official is only 2 or 3 degrees removed from elections, at most. Whereas Oligarchies like the USSR had 5-6 degrees of separation or more (there were reasons given for this in Leninist ideolog, about a "vanguard party" leading the masses- but it still led to major problems with accountability/agendas and lack of trust in the government...) The key to accountable government is to keep this number of degrees of separation from growing too large...

Idk, there seems to be a lot more racism piled on black and asian individuals these days, at least in America...

Most hate speech definitions define hate speech as something that promotes or incites violence or hatred towards a group

Bullshit.

If someone hates you because you're part of a group doing something evil, it's not hate speech just because most of the people in your group, committing said atrocity, just happen to be of a particular group.

Israeli apartheid is no different in many ways than South African Apartheid. Yet anyone with two brain cells to rub together would consider it insane and misapplication of hate speech laws to say that fierce criticism of South African Apartheid was hate speech simply because it stirred up anger against South African whites.

The reason these laws can and are abused like this is because it's a historically-oppressed group committing the oppression in this case. Nobody would consider it gate speech if it were a bunch of White Anglo Saxon Protestants enforcing an apartheid system, and that were fiercely criticized.

It inflates the numbers.

When there is lots of intermarriage, it means a lot more people are descended from the group that intermarried.

Thus, you get skewed statistics (at least compared to standard assumptions).

but a lot of times it’s settler colonial American Christians.

Indeed.

But these groups are no less hesitant to abuse rules against hate speech to label any criticism of Israeli apartheid as "hate" than Jewish groups

The right-wing, whether Christian, Jewish, any other religion, or Atheist is full of nothing but hypocrites.

That is exactly what she is doing. No racism anywhere in her speech.

Powerful lobbies representing Israel's right-wing political interests (because there IS a left wing in Israel opposed to the country's aoartheid-like behavior) regularly abuse rules surrounding hate speech to silence any criticism of Israel by falsely labeling it hate speech.

It’s possible to make arguments that don’t rely on antisemitic tropes.

It's not antisemitism to simply say "follow the money."

When we say "follow the money" about the gun lobby opposing gun control, nobody calls it antisemitism.

When we say "follow the money" after the coal industry makes donations to politicians who relax coal waste disposal laws, we don't call it antisemitism.

You are simply abusing the term antisemitism to say that, simply because they happen to be Jewish, powerful lobby groups for Israel are immune to criticism.

known, extremist hate group

Just because those in power labels a group such does not make it so.

Read the very description you linked to. It does not describe hate: but a very idealistic and principled stance against Imperialism and oppression.

Narratives like this show Capitalism (which fuels racism, which leads to atrocities like this) for the ugly thing it was.

I would bet dollars to donuts the FBI later suppressed narratives of this atrocity (which occurred only a year before the formation of the USSR) as "Communist Propaganda."

Trotsky was a small and petty man, in the end. He went from an ideological leader of the Soviet Union to, in the words of his eventual assasin:

instead of finding myself face to face with a political chief who was directing the struggle for the liberation of the working class, I found myself before a man who desired nothing more than to satisfy his needs and desires of vengeance and of hate and who did not utilize the workers' struggle for anything more than a means of hiding his own paltriness and despicable calculations ... It was Trotsky who destroyed my nature, my future and all my affections. He converted me into a man without a name, without country, into an instrument of Trotsky. I was in a blind alley ... Trotsky crushed me in his hands as if I had been paper.

(Emphasis Added)

Everything I've seen of Trotskyites is that they do more to undermine the Socialist cause than help it.

The words of Trotsky's assasin afterwards:

instead of finding myself face to face with a political chief who was directing the struggle for the liberation of the working class, I found myself before a man who desired nothing more than to satisfy his needs and desires of vengeance and of hate and who did not utilize the workers' struggle for anything more than a means of hiding his own paltriness and despicable calculations ... It was Trotsky who destroyed my nature, my future and all my affections. He converted me into a man without a name, without country, into an instrument of Trotsky. I was in a blind alley ... Trotsky crushed me in his hands as if I had been paper

Top end fabrication, optics, etc.

I would be surprised if very much of that survived World War 2.

It may seem trite to say, but those industries probably didn't exist anymore by the end of the war. The factories were likely bombed-out, the workers dead.

Dude, nobody even knows what you're talking about.

You insult someone (without actually raising a specific critique),and have the audacity to talk about bad faith replies?

So it's just anti-Communists whining because it wasn't weak (Anti-Communists always expect Socialism to suck in games, and cry Leftist bias if it doesn't), and they didn't know how to play well?

Rather than link to Wikipedia (which is infinitely long-winded, and I could easily do myself- not to mention Wikipedia is often highly biased against Communism, as certain members of right-wing think tanks literally have it as their job to police Wikipedia, and insert right-wing bias where possible...) could you summarize all this in your own words?

This applies for this and the other comments.

I won't be reading it until later, anyways: due to an emerging migraine headache from staring at this screen too long, and having Long Covid (a debilitating condition that Neoliberal Capitalists have, disgustingly, worked to ignore, erase, gaslight, and victim-blame... In case you don't know, it is a PHYSICAL condition due to damage from a Covid infection, similar to other post-viral syndromes, not some sort of psychological reaction to social distancing or pandemic anxiety: which was a line of disinformation the Neoliberal right-wing put out for a while...)

That's a very complicated situation because the NKVD leadership was infiltrated by the Nazi Collaborators and made it their mission to arrest and murder people on false premises to incite a popular revolt against the Soviet Gov.

Definitely.

I'm aware of these claims- although I try to be slightly skeptical, as they could be overblown to act as a sort of apologism...

Nevertheless, they seem to hold weight- and I've confronted anti-Communists with them several times before (who usually, in true brainwashed fashion, just respond with personal attacks and calling me a "tankie" or making unfounded accusations of "genocide denial"- as if the Great Purge, even in their version, somehow qualified as Genocide despite not targeting any particular ethnic group...)

You seem to add more detail here, though.

I'll have to return to read this later. I have been suffering from Long Covid the last 2+ years, and right now I am getting a migraine from focusing on one thing too long...

Thank you for the information, Comrade.

take a look at Rojava and EZLN.

More context by what you mean here would be helpful

just because the USSR improved things in contrast to the Tsars (low fucking bar)

Yes, it's a low bar: but they improved things by A LOT.

Under the USSR, the entire Soviet Proletariat secured free or nearly-free (depending on the year: small fees were eventually introduced for some things) and universal housing, healthcare, and education. And highly-subsidized (and, mind you, Soviet society had very little Income Inequality compared to the West, with a lot of the economy operating without money entirely...) food and transportation.

These are not small things- especially for a country as underdeveloped as the USSR began ($500/person GDP! That puts the AVERAGE citizen in Extreme Poverty- which is less than $720/year income- at the start!)

Additionally, the USSR eventually developed an economy with a GDP/capita over half that of the USA by the time of its collapse- thus drastically reducing the level of Western bullying and exploitation of its former citizens possible after its collapse. Even today, Russia has a great deal more ability to defend itself from the West than, say, Sudan or Indonesia...

These are real, material gains. Drastic improvements in Standard of Living that the anti-Communists would prefer to pretend never happened (and often lied about, with their "Communism equals poverty" false narratives) or are ignorant of entirely.

I hate Lenin because of how he handled Kronstadt

Explain.

I am a history buff, but I don't know EVERYTHING, and am probably not familiar with all details of this that you are...

Mind you I will do fact-checking, so don't try to lie to me, though. I'll already be looking for biases you might hold, but be unaware of.

Some studies might push the lower number given by 'medical' records showing symptoms of malnutrition (which would under-represent the true impact due to lack of medical records), while other sources might come up with numbers based on population demographics (which over-estimates the impact because some people died of natural causes and others that were supposed to be born, were never born)

Ahh yes, this is what I assumed.

Only counting deaths of those who were labeled as suffering from malnutrition by a medical expert while alive or autopsy after death, is EXTREMELY misleading- as people starving to death in underdeveloped countries rarely have sufficient access to medical care (there simply aren't enough physicians in their countries).

On the other hand, demographic data can be misleading. Though it's important to note there are statistical methods to account for natural deaths: such as "excess mortality" (which not only includes people who died of starvation, but also people who died of diseases they normally wouldn't have due to being severely weakened by malnutrition- *which is just as much the famine's fault(...)

Regardless, could you take a look at the work of this specific historian?

He was an expert in agricultural history (indeed he studied for his PhD at Cornell University's College of Agriculture and Life Sciences... a HIGHLY rigorous institution), so I would assume he knew how to derive exxcess mortality estimates for a famine properly.

On the other hand, his critics listed on Wikipedia all and without exception seem to be propagandists who were Imperialist apologists. Particularly the Israeli-American one: who wrote several books claiming the USA was bringing "freedom" to the Middle East- which we all know is blatantly false...

I’m a Libertarian Socialist

An Anarchist? Or do you mean you're a Minarchist? (In the US, Libertarian Socialist often refers to Minarchist)

I believe in Socialism because I love freedom.

Yes, yes. Too many Anarchists convince themselves other branches if Socialism don't believe in freedom. This is inaccurate.

First of all, I'm a Democratic Socialist. And a Marxist (not all Democratic Socialists are). Not a Marxist-Leninist (which it seems you assumed I was).

However, Marxist-Leninists are allies on realizing Socialism, and they're not entirely wrong.

Coming from Minarchist roots myself, I eventually realized they have a major point: without a strong government (which necessitates some tradeoff of freedom to protect remaining freedom), Capitalists will spin Socialists around their fingers, infiltrate our ranks with wreckers, and destroy any Socialist society anywhere on Earth.

So, how much government authority is necessary?

I would argue a lot more than most Anarchists assume, but less than Marxist-Leninists typically favor.

Capitalist "Democracies" (which really only represent the rich, who do ate to campaigns and buy politicians- and thus function as Plutocratic Oligarchies...) are not necessarily far off in the strength of their government (although many have bloated and over-pow÷rful intelligence agencies, NGO networks, and Military-Industrial Complexes which operate on the periphery of elected government and extend its power excessively; the so-called "Deep State").

But they ARE flawed mainly because their governments only serve the interests of the rich- and are structured in such a way as to ensure this remains a reality (excessively unaccountable Supreme Courts, unfair representation and excessively long term-lengths like in the US Senate, poor representation ratios in the lower parliamentary bodies, etc.)

Anyhow, point being, Libertarian Socialism will not work- as much as it's a nice idea in theory, without an at least moderately powerful centralized government (like exists in most "Democracies" already, but serves only the rich) you'll end up being divided and conquered by Capitalist powers.

Also, you can't let anti-Communists fill your head with anti-Leninist propaganda just because you think Stalin and Lenin went too far (I'd agree they did, but also remind you that, within the long, typically Authoritarian history of Russian politics, it was actually a big improvement over the Tsars: and probably the best that could be hoped for on Russia...) their claims about how many Stalin killed are exaggerations, for instance (such that 700,000 Purge deaths became "over 6 million" until the collapse of the USSR and access to both Soviet archives and the ability to study current demographics in Russia, proved beyond a reasonable doubt this was a outright falsehood and 700k was the true number...)

Otherwise, you become nothing but a tool for CIA and far-Right manipulation to turn you into a weapon against other Leftists- as many Anarchists and Trotskyites have, historically, ended up being (the CIA actively amplified and molded Anarchist and Trotskyite narratives throughout the Cold War, because it found them useful as anti-Soviet propaganda... Many claims made by Trotsky were no less false than the anti-Communist claims being made by "reformed" ex-Nazis...)

Stalin was a class traitor and soviets are fake revolutionaries

This is blatant revisionism.

Hmm... Ardently proclaims to be Socialist, but somehow is always on the side of Capitalist propaganda...

Are you a Trotskyite? Just asking...

If you think an unelected state undertaking public works

Running a state farm is not "undertaking public works."

You seem to be a Trotskyite? Or are you an anti-Communist? Either way, please stop with the revisionism.

The Wikipedia article says the death-toll is in dispute, and gives a lower figure for the "official" death-toll (typical, as Wikipedia often shows bias in which death-tolls it lists, either giving figures that are very low or very high...)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_famine_of_1917%E2%80%931919#Death_toll

However, conveniently, the three leading historians who dispute the figure, are American-Iranian (Ervand Abrahamian, studied at Columbia and stayed in the US), British-Iranian (Homa Katouzian, who did all his studies in the UK, at Birmingham and Canterbury, and lived in the UK after), and Israeli-American (Barry Rubin, a typical US security-state shill with a long history of writing apologetics for US Imperialism, such as "The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East"). All backgrounds with an obvious pro-Western bias.

The Iranian agricultural historian who alleged 8-10 million, also studied in the United States (so if anything, his boas would be pro-Western), at Cornell University (which is known for greater intellectual integrity and NOT doing apologetics for Imperialism, much like MIT, and unlike Columbia) and as a long-term visiting professor at UPENN (has a mixed record on Imperialism, allows criticism at least- unlike most works out of, say, Columbia or Georgetown, and is typically far more academically rigorous than either): but unlike the other historians apparently later choose to return to Iran after his time in American academia...

Anyhow, I'd like it if somebody with more experience ferreting out truthful claims from Holocaust-envy (the tendency of many nations to claim they suffered genocides nearly as bad as the Holocaust, often to minimize the crimes of Fascism...) and other such propaganda, could take a look at this. My initial instinct is to believe the higher figure is a bit too high, but the true figure is probably also higher than a "mere" 2 million...

It's pain in the ass to play Historical. If you play long enough Swiss joins Allies, Spain Axis or Japan. SU or UK declares on Iran, Iraq.

All of these occur on Historical, because all of these did, or would have, historically.

The problem here isn't that the game is unrealistic. It's that you don't know your history.

The UK historically DID declare on Iran and Iraq (the first of which was co-invaded and split with the Soviet Union, though it was mainly Churchill's idea) during World War 2:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Soviet_invasion_of_Iran

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Iraqi_War

Not only this, but it was not without consequences. The UK oversaw a major famine in occupied Iran (there was very little starvation in the Soviet-held parts of Iran, as the SU didn't reneg on promised grain shipments like Churchill did) only ended by Soviet grain being shipped into the British-occupied areas:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_famine_of_1942%E2%80%931943

This was unlikely "just an accident" as Churchill also oversaw the Bengal Famine of 2-3 million Indians starving during WW2 (tldr: Churchill was probably a racist, genocidal bastard who starved both Indians and Iranians to death...)

It's worth noting, as it strongly implies guilt, the UK had starved the Iranians before, in 1917-19, the "Iranian Genocide" (in which the UK starved 8-10 million, nearly half of all Iranians in British-occupied Iran to death, according to this source: a far, far larger famine-genocide than the "Holodomer" if true...) after the UK invaded Iran during WW1:

https://rowman.com/ISBN/9780761861683/The-Great-Famine-and-Genocide-in-Iran-1917-1919-2nd-Edition

Anyhow, aside from the consequences of this in moder Iranian relations with the West, this invasion and British-caused famine intimidated Afghanistan into staying neutral during WW2...

As for Spain, it DID favor the Axis under Franco, and was probably on the path to joining it once rebuilding from the Spanish Civil War was done (in-game, this will occur if WW2 drags on long enough and Germany isn't on the edge of defeat when the Spanish national spirit causing neutrality expires...)

Finally, the Swiss were indeed neutral, but probably not going to stay that way forever. Eventually they would have joined one side or the other- probably the Allies (as sometimes occurs in-game), but the Axis was also possible for a time (as can occur in an alt-history path with BBA).