borschtisgarbo@lemmygrad.ml to chapotraphouse@hexbear.netEnglish · 3 months agowhy did the sino-soviet split have to happen?lemmygrad.mlimagemessage-square55fedilinkarrow-up196arrow-down10
arrow-up196arrow-down1imagewhy did the sino-soviet split have to happen?lemmygrad.mlborschtisgarbo@lemmygrad.ml to chapotraphouse@hexbear.netEnglish · 3 months agomessage-square55fedilink
minus-squareComradeMonotreme [she/her, he/him]@hexbear.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up55·edit-23 months agoGenerally I feel with the Sino Soviet split, USSR was right for the wrong reason, PRC wrong for the right reasons.
minus-squareTomorrow_Farewell [any, they/them]@hexbear.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up6·3 months agoWhat?
minus-squareRedcuban1959 [any]@hexbear.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up46·3 months agoKhrushchev (Cornman) was a cringe revisionist, but he did some good stuff. China was right on being critical of Cornman, but their actions after that were cringe.
minus-squareComradeMonotreme [she/her, he/him]@hexbear.netlinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up8·3 months agoYeah pretty much Krushchev and the USSR were usually on the correct side (Cuba, Vietnam etc). The PRC were often correct in their criticism of the USSR’s revisionism but lead to bad stuff like supporting Pol Pot and the Muhjahaden.
Generally I feel with the Sino Soviet split, USSR was right for the wrong reason, PRC wrong for the right reasons.
What?
Khrushchev (Cornman) was a cringe revisionist, but he did some good stuff. China was right on being critical of Cornman, but their actions after that were cringe.
Yeah pretty much Krushchev and the USSR were usually on the correct side (Cuba, Vietnam etc).
The PRC were often correct in their criticism of the USSR’s revisionism but lead to bad stuff like supporting Pol Pot and the Muhjahaden.