← Back to context

Comment by delaminator

3 hours ago

Yeah, here's some examples of all these fascists doing exactly that:

Soviet Union - The show trials of the 1930s were conducted with full legal apparatus: confessions, judges, verdicts. Stalin's purges operated through legally constituted troikas. Entirely "lawful" by Soviet law.

East Germany (DDR) - The Stasi's surveillance and harassment programmes were codified in law. When the wall fell, many Stasi officers genuinely argued their conduct was legal under GDR statute: a defence that West German courts largely rejected.

Castro's Cuba - Mass executions after the revolution were conducted by legally constituted revolutionary tribunals. Castro explicitly defended this on legality grounds when challenged by foreign press in 1959.

Chavez/Maduro's Venezuela - Suppression of opposition media, jailing of political opponents was consistently defended as operating within Venezuelan law, which was progressively rewritten to make it so. Classic self-referential legality.

Mao's Cultural Revolution - The revolutionary committees had legal standing. Persecution of intellectuals and landlords proceeded through formal (if kangaroo) legal processes.

3 comments

delaminator

Reply
oscaracso  1 hour ago

You should ask the language model that output this text the definition of 'whataboutism,' and if the comment you've posted responds meaningfully to the discussion at hand.

  • abustamam  1 hour ago

    I think similar to how AI-generated comments are frowned upon, "this comment was generated by Ai" comments should also be frowned upon. It's really annoying to see a well written comment and replies that don't address the comment but just accuse the poster of having used Ai to generate the comment.