What the actual fuck was their problem?
I don't know a single thing about the Khmer Rouge or Pol Pot, except that it's sometimes mentioned around here for getting assistance from CIA and killing individuals with glasses. Is there any truth to that at all?
Other urls found in this thread:
prisoncensorship.info
twitter.com
This shit is unironically what primmies think is revolutionary progress.
They were ethnonationalist barbarians abusing their power. Worst """socialist""" government in history surpassing even C**sescu.
Just as much truth to the idea that Stalin created a famine to genocide Ukranians.
No one believes that, not even anti-communists. But the thing about the Khmer is repeated here of all places.
you're giving them too much credit
I mean the intellectuals that wrote the books about the trillions, not the retards that grasp at straws.
The Khmer Rouge had much more in common with fascism's palingenetic nationalism than anything even remotely ML. They were first and foremost concerned with agrarian romanticism and everything else (ethnic nationalism, forced communal living, fanatical anti-modernism, etc) pretty much flowed from there.
Who let Robert Conquest post here?
u wot m8
Try to find just one (1) source or piece of evidence for your beliefs in the innocence of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge.
Honestly, I could find a few but I’m not gonna help this fag out
lol so no big deal then. what a nice guy amirite?
I actually expect that number as the number of bourgeoisie in the country is fairly close to that, so It may have been justifiable. I still have no clue tbh.
What the fuck is this nonsense? How exactly could emptying cities be a relevant solution to famine and economic collapse? The Khmer Rouge closed down factories, universities and hospitals.
Reminder that you don't need to defend the CIA shill Pol Pot
You have an actual based commie to look up to who utterly BTFO him
Wait shit, he is still alive and is an MP…
Yeah, the US basically forced him out under threat of invasion
Imagine an army unit spending decade in forest, spending grand time and their commanders are sadistic fucks who arent under control of the gov
Zig Forums
go away liberal
the idea that anyone could possibly believe both mao and deng are revolutionary socialists is just insane.
a revolution isn't a dinner party you dumb fuck
Just because something calls itself "communist" or "socialist" doesn't mean it is or that you should defend it because it calls itself such.
False and false
After Vietnam's Imperialist aggression against Cambodia this puppet continued to make the Nation more and more Dengist until he outright became a Rightist Had his party (Which still controls the parliament to this day) drop socialism embrace Right-Populism and allowed a UN Occupation and resurrection of the Monarch
Not a socialist
Pol-Pot was un-Ironically better because he organized workers directly into agricultural communes and attempted to abolish commodity production and Money
Despite the fucked way he went about it of course
Except it wasnt though
See….
Can you give evidenc that the vietnamese puppet gov enacted socialist reforms?
That's what Marx described as "barracks communism" — a crude strain of egalitarianism predicated upon forced communal living and opaque authoritarian control. Marx's criticism of Nechayev and his committee can be transposed almost verbatim into a criticism of Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge.
Assuming these counter-revolutionaries are captured there are other options. (Direct threats should be dealt with accordingly.)
Steps to not execute capitalist scum, but still prevent harm to society.
Senseless violence will lead us right back into authoritarianism.
No the user that posted the original comment, but I'm also not a liberal either. Social anarchism calls for reintegration when possible. Alexander Berkman called for it.
How do you even function with such a black-and-white worldview? World history must be a wild ride. All those feudal monarchies were taking part in revolutionary activity because they fought against other feudal monarchies!
randomly executing all bourgeois people because you believe they will become "counter-revolutionaries" is barbaric
This, repressing counter-revolution doesnt need to take the form of senseless killing, especially because violence against counterrevolutionaries far too easily turns into violence against fellow workers who may have different views on socialism than the dominant faction. The second that happens the revolution is lost, since there can't be socialism without democracy, and there can't be democracy without free expression of ideas.
why? seems unnecessarily crude
Less crude than splattering their brains on the wall.
he dindu nuffin
I hear in left-wing spaces that Pol Pot received support from the CIA but I don't think there's any evidence of that – at least direct support. You can make a better argument that the U.S. war in Vietnam and the bombing of Cambodia destabilized it enough for the Khmer Rouge to take power, yes, but the evidence of the CIA arming them is pretty thin. The U.S. supported the FANK. Now, the Khmer Rouge also used a lot of U.S.-sourced weapons captured from the FANK (or just bought directly from corrupt military officers) but that's different.
There's a book by Ben Kiernan called "Blood and Soil" about the history of mass killings and he writes that "cults of antiquity and agrarianism" are big warning signs.
Man, crossed sucked.
you have to prove that that is the case.
I doubt there was that many borgs in the country.
how the fuck is that even an answer
they were actively fighting the vietnamese
if they weren't receiving assistance from cia special activities directly they were inadvertently helping them through the conflict
they fought them later. the khmer rouge had support from china and (socialist) vietnam in the 60s.
Any good books or documentaries on the true Khmer Rouge?
...
cross is great