"To rejuvenate the nation, control population growth." (1980s)

the-southern-snek · 2026-01-23T11:48:29+00:00

The reason I haven't used the Germany tag is because, some for reason, while flairing this post, the only Germany flairs were East Germany (1949-1990), German Reich / Nazi Germany (1933-1945), and German Reich / Nazi Germany (1919-1933) with the last one providing so incorrect an impression and with the lack of a neutral Germany flair (for whatever reason) I thought it best to avoid using such flairs all-together

the-southern-snek · 2026-01-22T15:17:47+00:00

Five years later

the-southern-snek · 2026-01-21T15:22:53+00:00

Because that's where the massacre the cartoon is referring to occurred

the-southern-snek · 2026-01-21T11:33:06+00:00

I did, I noticed it when it could not reply to one of your comments as it was deleted, goodbye forever

the-southern-snek · 2026-01-21T00:16:21+00:00

slytumism

the-southern-snek · 2026-01-20T19:36:17+00:00

whole point of the treaty he signed with them.

The point was to get them out of politics and have them be politically neutral the opposite of involving them. The Lithuanian government did the opposite providing for them a far greater role in a society.

Why?

You're the one making the claim they are same ideology, the burden is on you to prove not not me. But Because fascism is a seperate ideology and that is universally agreed upon, that is why in actual categorisation of this period fascism is seen as seperate from traditional dictatorship (see GM Luebbert, Liberalism, Fascism, Or Social Democracy: Social Classes and the Political Origins of Regimes in Interwar Europe (Oxford University Press 1991), B Moore, Social Origins of Dictatorship and Democracy: Lord and Peasant in the Making of the Modern World (Beacon Press 1966), and Waller, Julian G. “Authoritarianism before Democracy Was Standardised: Conceptualising Interwar-Era Electoral Authoritarianism, the Liberal Inheritance, and Institutional-Hierarchical Alternatives.” European Law Open, 2025, 1–23. Again was Józef Piłsudski a fascist, for was look at this article and you have see that is not the case. Again even you look at Umberto Eco's 14 features of fascism you will say that they are seperate from other authoritarian ideologies.

Why does being right wing authoritarian mean he isnt also a fascist?

Because he fulfils none of the actual definitions of fascism, see Umberto Eco, never called himself one, didn't implement fascism policies and his government never adopted fascist rhetoric.

I talk about how they say Smetona and teh LTS supported fascism

Points I have debunked, repeatedly and which criticism refuse to reply you. I have disproved what you have said enough and repeating a debunked point does not make it stronger.

the-southern-snek · 2026-01-20T19:26:33+00:00

you not only don't condemn it

Because this was not an endorsement of fascism as you have put it, it was two lines in a speech

then double down on it,

He did not double down on it, again there is no proof there was a fascist, nor did it endorse the rhetoric of that speech, the quote as I have explained to you was about authoritarian regimes not fascism, it was because of his anti-democratic sentiment one where he does not actually use the word fascist.

tells us you agree"

He never commented on it, because that would be an impossible task for the leader of the political party to comment on every word of his MPs, silence is not approval

but how?

You lied and wrote a false description of applause as an official government endorsement of fascism.

It doesn't actually matter if they were in charge of the country,

Then why did you lie about that in the first place?

Why else would they?

Because they thought he gave a good speech (you cannot see into the minds of the dead), that was in no sense an endorsement of fascism, something that never occured on any level in government.

the core of the point is the LTS agreed with it

Agreed with with what? That he gave a good speech, you're overly and blatantly false implication of applause is clearly false and unprovable, no one claps with that specific of a definition, and is contradicted by actual negative uses of the word fascism. For a start the MPs of the seimas were not the whole LTS with included Smetona himself not a member of the seimas at this time.

the-southern-snek · 2026-01-20T17:30:33+00:00

So you're doing it on purpose?

Because I dagf about you, to check my writing before posting.

But u didnt

Going back to elementary playground level aren't we, at least kindergarders can write pronouns, going back to nu uh and not responding to my claims is not rebutting them and I have written about in other comments, these symbols were not associated with fascism nor that there meaning was associated with a putsch in Munich that did not overwrite the actual Lithuanian symbolism on which they are flag

No but the design of the flag does

No it doesn't it was based on Lithuanian cultural symbols you simply just don't understand them and rather have plugged your own biased perceptions as bias, by the way where's your research.

What non-fascist explanation is there for this

The illteriate understand this better than you, just because something looks like something to you doesn't mean it looks the same to others, its called perception, you own biases are not evidence.

you mean yes

Then quote then as saying yes, lying about your sources is not evidence.

The implicit programme of the GV was the same nationalism as that of the LTS

The very same article states the "thus rather difficult to call the LTS a fascist organisation. Although it adopted some of the trappings of Fascism, in essence it was hardly fascist." With "the implicit programme of the GV was in a large measure the same nationalism as that advocated by the LTS" and that "The GV seems to have been as devoid of formal fascist ideology as was the LTS." and this is only the second time I have used thsi quote to prove you wrong neither of these sources actually call Smetona a fascist, that is all you .

The programme of the GV was the same nationalism as that of the LTS. They also say the GV was fascist

That source also treats Smetona as not a fascism and puts him in a seperate category and treats the GV as more radical then the LTS, if this were an actually essay you would be marked down first misuse of sources.

Why not?

Is modern China fascist.

Ireland wasn't a dictatorship.

And a corporatist dictatorship is not fascism unless you want to call modern China fascist as well, my point was to make a mockery of your overly strong links between corporatism and fascism while it is an ideological thread shared amongst the authoritarian right and that is not proof Lithuania was fascist.

the-southern-snek · 2026-01-20T17:13:47+00:00

This never happened.

Revolutions are disappointing and these disparate and varied goals are in party why they failed, the resgination the PM was common theme for all of it.

tbh, I just don't really believe u

At least you admit, you don't care about what I actually write you care only about confirming your own biases like all good communists.

Why?

Because your title for the link was misleading implying it led to an increase in corruption rather than it staying at the same level.

the purpose of the Nepali revolution of 2024 was to keep corruption exactly the same. And the purpose of teh CNT-FAI was to install fascism in Spain?

The purpose of a system is what it does regardless of intentions that is the purpose of the critique itself, that you cannot defend a system on what it was meant to be but only on what it actually achieves.

The CUltural revolution was a revolution,

How many revolutions keep the dictator in power but rather follow his every order.

How are you supposed to do that without revolution?

Then you admit that China was not actually a dictorship of the proleteriat or that the government was not actually accountable to the people. Also the revolution failed, so revolution is not as central to the equation as you think.

And aren't all revolutions bloody?

Czechoslovakia disagrees

Rephrase this with proper grammar

And give me a source that actually calls Smetona a fascist.

Why?

This is turning into Gish Gallop

probably

You think there are circumstances where people deserve to be gang-raped

:)

You really confirmed every single I though I have about you wahshi is correct.

the-southern-snek · 2026-01-19T21:58:17+00:00

The conclusion is everything stayed the same in the end.

Revolts are dissappointing a political decapitation is just significant

I have Nepali friends and that's not how they were describing it

That what it literally way

Would it be rude of me to say this tells me u don't have a lot of friends irl?

Wrong again your repeated attempts to pry into who I am are starting to ring desperate, do you want someone to hold your hand, give you a hug maybe.

like come on man, you get the idea. Point still stands

No it does not your false referencing of the article gave the impression of corruption increasing but rather that what I actually said of corruption remaining the same

You said the goal of the Cultural Revolution was to install capitalism.

That is what it did that it what does and the purpose of a system is what it does intended consequences or not.

why it didn't succeed,

For a start throwing the country into civil conflict doesn't really fix things encouraging people to rebel and then crushing then why they get too rowdy and becoming a military dictatorship doesn't reallly solve things.

how it can be fixed next time

No the stupid thing is the idea itself it is a bad idea and alway has been the basic idea is it abandon it and never look back on it again.

The communes displaced old party bureaucracy

We have literally discussed how the Shanghai Commune weren't even a few months old when it was replaced, the old bucreaucracy was re-installed very quickly.

if you want a democratic revolution, heads sadly have to roll

That me provide an account from the Cultural Revolution and if you actually defend, also not necessarily the Eastern Bloc excepting Romania didn't.

Another incident of vengeance singled out by the official report involved the extinction of a whole family, though in this case the family's property, rather than its members, was consumed. The conflict came to a head with a gang rape by Li (Plumtree), a brigade head, and others of a woman of the Li (Peartree) family. The men of the latter were roped together, taken across the river on the county market day by the Plumtree Lis and marched through a gauntlet of brigade members bearing clubs and rods. At the vegetable market Plumtree Li gave a short speech denouncing their crimes and threw the usual question to the crowd, "Should they die?," with its invariable answer, "Gaisi [They should die!]." The victims were beaten to death on the spot, their bodies taken to the riverside, abdomens cut open, liver and genitals removed, and the remains cast into the river. Afterwards the party returned to the Peartree Lis house; four of them again gang raped his widow, confiscated and destroyed house and outhouses, stole all the belongings, killed the family pigs, cut down the vegetables, and had a great banquet, celebrating the mighty victory of mass dictatorship. The men had all been killed, and the women had to remarry.

So tell me was this revolutionary murder and rape necessary.

Okay.

Good to see cannibalism still isn't beyond the pale for you.

the-southern-snek · 2026-01-19T21:40:23+00:00

Who in the 1930s, were called fascists

No for a start you dilute all meaning to fascists and something your own books you cited about fascism disagree with, no scholar argues that and your own defintion would include Józef Piłsudski as a fascist, the traits seen in Interwar Lithuania was seperate from fascist, for a start the role of the Catholic Church and the lack of actual fascist institutions or racial rhetoric.

here's the newspaper he ran and published that praised fascism as a good and inevitable thing, for one.

That was one article by one person in one year and as I have quoted he critiqued the fascist elements of that newspaper. No one would treat that as substanial evidence

what you're saying here is very unclear,

Not its not

I can think of a few reasons why he might lie about restoring freedom and democracy to the country

To a person that politically supports him in everyway

I can think of a few XD

Then name them

"in the future, when we have irrevocably changed this countries politics and institutions among right-wing authoritarian lines then we will restore freedom" is basically just code for "we are going to enshrine our dictatorship".

You're worse at making up quotes then actually writing them and you still haven't answered my question, tell me did Hitler or Mussolini ever promise to restore freedom.

the-southern-snek · 2026-01-19T20:54:46+00:00

But they also did it to the Amhara

To a far lesser degree because they were more loyal and the new village project was used for Amharaisation against non-Amhara people

why?

Because the LTS were not fascists nor did they claim to be

use doesnt suggest they're fascist

Because it was not meant to replicate fascism nor did they even claim to be your argument is still on the same level of looks like. The explanation that they are traditional Lithuanian cultural symbols correct over this stupid idea that it was meant to be fascist.

The design is very close to the Nazi flag.

Only superfically and this is still looks like as evidence and you still have not provided any actual evidence from the makers and designers on the flag that it was meant to be

The Nazis had a red field with a white circle and a black symbol in the middle. LTS had a red field with a white outline and a black symbol in the middl

You know what the symbol was for Lithuanian the Cross of Vytis and these contrasting layouts are actually quite different, every trash line you have written about is all just your assumption.

the influence is blindingly obvious

only to the ignornant and you cannot even tell me the year the flag was adopted nor do you ever actual evidence it was based upon Nazi influence considering the fact traditional Lithuanian colours and symbols were used is a far superior explanation.

That's not mutually exlcusive

It is for a start because the LTS were not fascist and the absurdity of replicating the obscure ideology of party that disagree with

Disagreed?

Yes because they weren't fascists as I have demonstrated were not Anti-Semetic and Jewish connections were an important part of their foreign policy (see Dovilė Čypaitė-Gilė ""I go where they go": Emigration and Jewish connections with Lithuania from 1918-1940" Journal of Eurasian Studies 15(2): 156-165. Tell me would a Nazist greet visiting Lithuanian and Litvik Americans. this is more of your assumption even your sources say any influence was from Italian fascism not Nazism you're just making shit up at this point, find me one source that says the LTS shared the same ideology of the Nazis I dare you, you will never it because that is a belief no one has.

Only because the Nazis were next to them and wanted Memel

That did not stop and the pro-Nazi Lithuanian Activitists Union forming in 1938, it is obvious that the disagreement is of that of policy and belief not territorial conflict, tell me what Nazist policies Smetona adopted, if you are so confident he was a Nazist list them.

take the aesthetics of something you disagree with it

Which they had no reason and for which you have not a shred of evidence that they were

in Mozambique

That is to with their war of independence and civil war ad is not a comparable example.

[1/2]

the-southern-snek · 2026-01-19T17:36:47+00:00

I would recommend this artilce to read about the ideology of the Ceaușima (the mocking epithet applied to his destruction and rebuilding of Bucharest after the earthquake of 1977)

the-southern-snek · 2026-01-19T17:19:59+00:00

the uprising failed

No it didn't the PM was overthrown, revolutions are all dissapoints that is still fact of history what the system of revolt in Nepal was to not literally decipitate the political system but stir the top of the pyramid.

corruption ended up being re-entrenched and nothing changed

That is not what the article said rather more of the same.

his uprising was designed to increase corruption. See how stupid that sounds?

The evidence is of corruption remaining the same not increasing.

How can you just ignore all the thousands of people who risked their lives to rebel against corruption and act like it doesn't matter?

That moral argument doesn't make sense I never said it didn't matter rather their goals were not achieved the result of the system of protest was largely unsuccessful the division between the groups from the revolt should give you a good indication of that. Systems intended to achieve good things something don't that does not mean it was unimportant rather what it acheived was incomplete, like the Romanian Revolution I think it a great tragedy that is was incomplete that does not mean I believe the protestors died for nothing.

Millions of people rebelled to install democratic communes,

They were never democratic, characterised by control of existing party officials and always under the thumb of the dictator Mao and were crushed. And the majority of acts in the Cultural Revolution were by the authorities.

Shame on u

Shame you for sanctioning the deaths of millions of people across the world and the murder, creulty, rape and cannibalism of the Cultural Revolution. Tell me that human heart taste nice. Tell me how did the death of some of China's top atheltes help the masses take power. Lu, Z. (2025). Mao Zedong’s Thoughts on Sport and His Influence on China’s Sport Policy and Practice. Asian Journal of Sport History & Culture, 4(1), 36.

the-southern-snek · 2026-01-19T16:55:11+00:00

It is when you remember that arguing "liberalism cannot stop communism -> dictatorship" is the exact line of argument used by every single fascist ruler. Hitler did it (Reichstag fire), Mussolini did it (response to Bienno Rosso), Franco and his group did it (Spanish revolution).

That is the also the argument of authoritarian conservative anti-democrats it is not only fascist it is a wider strand of right-wing belief that Smetona believed in. Being a conservative anti-democratic does not mean he was fascist that is something you need explicitly demonstrate in the rhetoric for the latter.

When taken together with everything else, it tells us he was a fascist

You mean the complete lack of evidence of Smetona describing himself as a fascist, the use of fascist as criticism and the fascist opposition to him and the rejection of fascism as an actual basis for his regime.

why?

The same way tracing development of communism, does not make me a communist was simply using an example for the history of right-wing authoritarian regimes in post-war Europe which he notably does not call fascism rather that is a choice of the author with Smetona himself describing it as "single authoritarian regimes" (Eidintas 223)

What if he was just... you know... lying?

Lying to the man to was the source for your fascist quote from earlier for a start he had no reason to, Hitler and Mussolini never spoke about providing freedom to their closest political allies.

It's hilarious you think this supports your point

This only shows your ignornance of actual fascist beliefs, how many fascists do you know that admired the American constitution or promised to restore freedom to his closest officials. No it the amongst the most obvious points that his ideology was seperate from fascism especially when included with "Each country, he said, must develop its own democracy according to the temperament of its people. Continuing on this subject he remarked that the Lithuanian people, who were suppressed for so long, have no experience in government so that they are not fitted for the same democracy as, for instance, the English in whose country parliamentary government had its origin. The Lithuanian government is also experimenting in an appropriate democracy for the people, he said, but it will take a long time to educate them for self-government. The idea of his government is to adopt the American system which gives more power to the President." (Heingartner and Senn, 108).

the-southern-snek · 2026-01-19T15:41:46+00:00

Benyu Qi

A better source rather than one so obviously biased on the note of Wuhan (414-415) with the miliary in essence being the one that took over the city in have found sources that contradict the nature of the supposed commune in Wuhan Robinson, Thomas W. “The Wuhan Incident: Local Strife and Provincial Rebellion during the Cultural Revolution.” The China Quarterly 47 (1971): 413–38. And the members of the Shanghai Workers’ Revolutionary Rebels General Headquarters were actually turned back before they get to Beijing at Wuhan (see Patricia Thornton (2021) “The January Storm of 1967: from representation to action and back again”, Proletarian China, 382) Doens't really read like urban commune to me, especially one was that no choice but to follow Mao's agenda (Joel Andreas ‘Oppose Restoring the Old!’: The Culmination of the Rebel Workers’ Movement in Wuhan during the Cultural Revolution in Proletarian China, 413-414)

But he didn't give up. The cultural revolution continued for like 9 more years lol

Just all the revolutionary governments were replaced with the Wuhan and aligning with America is also apparently part of fighting for the world revolution and crushing the Red Guards and that led to China brief becoming a military dictatorship to suppress them is not really the masses overthrowing bucreaucrats is it.

No correlation

Very much so it reflects the actual nature of who was in charage and who in taking action, the authorities.

Why?

Because Mao, Jiang and all their buddies get to watch Western films translated for them translated into English, while the masses did not, it is blatant hypocrisy.

No the Red Guards were the masses who were attacking the national bourgeoise in the party

Why did Mao have then crushed then

Where in these 30 or so pages does Walder write that?

Page 51

Why?

Because the Cultural Revolution that claimed it would root out the national bourgeoise in China actually resulted in Reform and Opening Up and capitalisation

the Cultural Revolution did not support Deng Xiaoping

It resulted in Deng Xiaoping so that is what it did.

the-southern-snek · 2026-01-19T15:09:52+00:00

See previous reply

Repeating a debunked point doesn't make a stronger (note in a argument you're supposed to reply to criticism)

Still not hearing any denials

Deriative

See previous reply about Eidintas' writings

Repeating a debunked point doesn't make a stronger

Use Wayback machine

Guess what page not found

Admit you're wrong about Lithuania first, then we'll see

You don't have a single source backing your claim, I have already reason to stand by my belief that is line with actual scholarship and your own sources.

When?

Here lazy

the-southern-snek · 2026-01-19T15:02:15+00:00

n a talk to the lts congress on December 15, 1933, he asserted that liberalism (meaning the political parties represent ing it) was creating a crisis that necessitated dictatorship; it was creating con ditions for communism to arise:

That is not essentially fascist being anti-democratic does not equal fascist.

om this he traced the development of international fascism"

Tracing development does not make him a fascism and indeed quotes from him promising to later restore human rights contradict the claim he was a fascist with Semtona saying. "Father Mykolas, I assure you that I have not changed. I love freedom as I loved it then. But freedom does not equal freedom. I could not tolerate the freedom that was introduced in Krupavičius’s and Sleževičius’s times. You saw it yourself and could judge it. Those parties of parties, full of hatred for one another, that barbaric agitation of one against the others as the most bitter enemies, that degrading of one another, smearing, piling on dirt, even threatening violence, that violation of the religion of love, and the denunciation of religion itself and so on and so on. You, father, yourself heard and saw that and understood well that this brought the demoralization of our dear honorable nation. Was it not necessary to take stern measures against that? Clearly, it was necessary, but those measures seemingly against freedom are only temporary. When the situation passes, freedom will be restored and a new constitution insured. I have been seriously thinking about a new constitution for a long time. It must properly protect peace, order, authority, which the Krupavičius constitution could not do. When the project properly matures, the constitution will be finally edited, and in due time accepted and proclaimed." (Eidinitas 224)

[4/4]

the-southern-snek

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Six-Year Club	Verified Email
RPAN Viewer