NY times praises mass murdering MAO as one of history's great revolutionary figures

[MindWars]

The New York Times was forced to delete a tweet that praised Communist dictator Mao Zedong – who was responsible for the deaths of around 45 million people – as a “great revolutionary leader.”


NY Times Praises Mass Murdering Mao as “One of History’s Great Revolutionary Figures”

YOU FKRS ARE MTNAL NUT JOBS HONEST TO GAW YOUR MINDS ARE WAY IN LEFT FIELD.
Awwww is your big leftist douche msm getting jack slapped oh no as you stupid fkrs laughed at Alex Jones . we told you pathetic bitches they are coming for you ass kissers too bahahhaa including u idiots on this board who think your so special bahahah gawd dam idiots.

 

[TNHarley]

They probably liked him because he killed tens of millions of people for his totalitarianism. The racist and bigoted left get off on that shit.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

As to Mousey Dung, the Left acknowledges (with lip service) that he made some mistakes, but that his heart was in the right place.

 

[pismoe]

thing is that 'mao' unified the country of 'china' . Who cares about the 'chinese' people that he killed . This unification achievement is often mentioned as being a great achievement and was said of 'chinas' first Emperor a couple thousand years ago by Historians today. The 'first emperor' of china is the guy with the huge --- big --- YUGE Pyramid in 'china' that has been being explored these last few decades . Anyway , seems to me that in the view of many that its the 'country' that matters rather than the people of the country that matters .

 

[MisterBeale]

Why the Hammer and Sickle Should Be Treated Like the Swastika
Why do we treat two equally bloody ideologies in such starkly different ways?

https://fee.org/articles/why-the-hammer-and-sickle-should-be-treated-like-the-swastika/

Where Do We Draw the Line?

<snip>
". . . . .This is the nub of the issue. While Naziism is intrinsically linked to the crimes of its followers, communism can always be separated. No one would tolerate a t-shirt emblazoned with Adolf Hitler or Benito Mussolini, yet the wildly oppressive Che Guevara is easily detached and morphed into a symbol of revolution.

But where do we draw the line? The communist ideology in its purest form might be separated from its implementations, but at what point does its awful track record discredit any attempts to advocate it?

As economist Murray Rothbard once said: “It is no crime to be ignorant of economics [...] But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.”

We need to say the same about communism. To continue advocating communism despite its dismal track record is neither well-intentioned nor misguided; it is a deliberate attempt to push a provably dangerous ideology. The history of communism is as bloodstained as that of Nazism; much more so, actually. It’s time we treated it as such."

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Hitler was a piker compared to Stalin and Mao.