this post was submitted on 14 Apr 2026
1 points (100.0% liked)

Socialism

6871 readers
4 users here now

Rules TBD.

founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Spreading good things is good, spreading bad things under the guise of spreading good things is bad. The USSR said they were spreading socialism and actually did so, the US Empire claims it spreads democracy but actually spreads genocide and violence, in order to establish imperialist relations.

[–] David_Eight@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Spreading anything by taking and maintaining control over a territory and its people is by definition, colonialism, is it not.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The soviets intervened at the request of factions in Afghanistan that had already taken power, though had not solidified it. They did not establish a colony nor expropriate wealth.

[–] David_Eight@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (2 children)

Just so I'm clear, are you saying a majority of the Afghan people wanted the Soviets in Afghanistan? Because that's not how I understand the situation being.

Also, was my definition of colonialism wrong?

[–] orc_princess@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

The legally and internationally recognized government of Afghanistan requested the Soviets for help many times until they decided to help them out. Literally google it.

[–] EmmiLime@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I think the dude is quite literally a descendant of Nazis considering his other post.

[–] orc_princess@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago

Sounds like at least a nazi sympathizer yeah but in case anyone else is reading it might help them learn more about the topic, which is very complicated ofc but definitely not "USSR bad"

[–] David_Eight@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago

That's not what I asked.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

The legitimate government of Afghanistan requested support. Afghanistan had many factions and infighting, but the legitimate government specifically requested support, which the soviets responded to.

[–] David_Eight@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (2 children)

That's not what I asked though. Did the majority of the Afghan people want the Soviets to intervene? Its my understanding that most Afghans didn't want the Soviets there, given how they overthrew the government a few years after the Soviets left.

Was my definition of colonialism wrong?

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago

The majority of Afghans did not want any one thing, it was highly factional. The government that invited the soviets in was a revolutionary government itself in the first place, from the winning faction at the time. Do you think the majority of Afghans wanted civil war? Without a clear majority, you have to focus on what's actually good and legitimate.

Your definition wasn't necessarily wrong outright, just not at all applicable to the soviets in Afghanistan. Your definition is severely lacking in the fact that colonialism is extractionary and set up for that purpose, for example.

[–] EmmiLime@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

okay you Nazi, you should go back to your Reddit home