Jewish workers were exploited in Russia just like all the others, and when the time came they sided with the Bolsheviks against the reaction, who - by the way - invited the allies to invade and occupy Russia.
Same goes for jewish workers in America and elsewhere: Most of them weren't business owners. In fact, it's only after jews fled Europe - who were often the ones with the means to escape abroad - that jews became a prominent cohort of the American bourgeoisie.
Meanwhile, even in America, jews don't even make up a plurality of the capitalist class. The wealthiest families continue to be old WASP money: Think Wilks, Kochs, Mars, Waltons, etc.
And while you've pretended to care about white workers, you still do not acknowledge the fundamental nature of class conflict. The dichotomy between the prole on the one hand - who has mostly nothing to sell but their labor-power, and the capitalist who owns the means of production and can buy and exploit labor-power at a discount.
Fascism doesn't acknowledge this. It still operates under a vulgar interpretation of classical economics where - if the managerial business owner is wealthier than the prole - it must be because the latter is working twice, ten times or a hundred times harder than the former.
After all, to acknowledge anything else, is to undermine fascist class collaboration. And the whole idea that the nation lives, breaths and acts as one for the benefit of all without discriminating based on class.
And even if we assume Generalplan Ost wasn't a real plan, Nazi atrocities are still evident throughout the war. Be it the slavery of fellow Europeans, the destruction of cities like Warsaw and Rotterdam, deliberate cultural destruction, massacres of civilians (Oradour, Lidice, etc.), orchestrated famines in Eastern Europe and cities like St Petersburg, the scheduled annihilation of Paris, etc.
Acts are louder than words. And as far as WW2 is concerned, the acts of the Nazi occupiers speak volumes about what sort of people they were. Much more than wishful propaganda.
And yes, the USSR suffered famine. But so did many other countries at the time. The Soviet authorities mitigated it even amidst trade restrictions and their status as an international pariah, and in the end the only time famine would ever struck again was in the face of the devastation left in the wake of the Nazi invasion. It still doesn't diminish the desirability or necessity of socialism. Even if Stalin was a literal baby-eater, and the Holodomor was an orchestrated genocide, we'd still be socialists. Because socialism doesn't necessitate or require either.
There's also a difference between putting convinced criminals to work and releasing them afterwards, and literal slavery of innocents, often to the point of death.
But again, you wouldn't understand because you don't subscribe to an actual class analysis. It's just all an (apocalyptic) battle between hiveminded races to you. If other Europeans were enslaved by the Nazi occupation, they were really just working for the betterment of their "race". Exploitation is not a thing that can exist between tribe members as far as Fascism is concerned.
Yes. God forbid we wish to be entitled to the fruits of our own labor. For all the complaints about "parasitic jews" you fascists are grossly offended when we subject our white bosses to the same standards. It's almost as if you're just the useful idiots of organized capita,l and are terrified of workers actually rising up as a result of their own class interests - regardless of race or creed.
Mind, for all I care, the gauche nouveau riche can keep their worthless jets, yachts and other trinkets they don't use anyway. I just don't want them to be bought off my exploitation.
Attached: ff5a29341f33562abc93bb5853af6322fe226cb21a3414965d158552a8c6a1d3.jpg (275x183, 5.47K)