Apparently I’m now a shitlib for not buying into this disgusting tankie propaganda that it was all the Wests fault and Stalin had to ally with Hitler.
For a mod who loves to ban others for bad jacketing, they sure have no problem doing it to other anarchists.
The Ban:
The Context:
I even read the whole article and thus thought it regarded the school as a whole
I’m honestly not sure what you mean. How does the article regarding the school as a whole factor into anything being discussed, or at all address how you were trying to present my arguments as lacking credibility because of an oversight in my citations based on a point I addressed in the same sentence?
The main reason for my original comment was the following:
Which again (intentionally or not) misrepresents historical fact. Weimar Germany was not at all the Third Reich…
This is a tedious and at-best-arguable semantic error on my part, since not only was it clearly in service of the future Nazi war machine (ex: Josef Harpe was a Nazi, and was one of the members of the school) and filled with then and future members of the Nazi party, the Nazis did run the school (and their rise to power lead to it’s dissolution, the complexities of which were my entire point).
That semantic error does obscure how the Nazis gaining power directly caused the USSR to terminate the program. Which unfortunately allows for the misinterpretation that the USSR started a tank school for the Nazi regime. They started it with Germany because both entities at the time saw a benefit to defying Versailles. The German Communist Party wasn’t yet outlawed and held like a quarter of the Reichstag at the time.
The failed strategy of the USSR was to undermine the victors of WW1, and hoped the communist wings of Europe would prevail.
They did not.
My point was that the situation surrounding the closure of the school was many-faceted. I appreciate you expanding upon that, though I fear you may have fallen into the same misunderstanding as they by fixating on your own interpretation of one phrase as critical, rather than the actual content of the message (that the complexity of the political motivations behind the creation and closure of the school was the reason I brought it up at all)
Yeah I wasn’t really disagreeing as pointing out how even such a semantic thing can lead to big misinterpretations given the complexity of the whole period.