Everybody knows that Wikipedia is literally unrefutable fact, especially on controversial or political topics. Why would someone lie or omit facts on the internet???
Next you’re going to tell me that I can’t trust CIA press releases too!!!
Usually Wikipedia is okay if, as it says, you use it as ‘a starting point for serious research, not an endpoint.’ The problem is that, in practice, roughly 95% of the people referencing it don’t use it this way and instead mistake it as a substitute for serious research.
It’s basically the Walmart of educational materials.
Everyone knows teachers love it when you use Wikipedia in school, it’s a real problem in some high schools because it’s a trick to get an easy A, if your teacher assigns you a topic for a paper you can just send them the wikipedia link for it and they’ll be forced to give you an A because you don’t actually need to do the work yourself in school
There’s just as much the CIA can patch, Wikipedia still provide a good account of famous historical events and plenty cross links, you can search for yourself and read the individual history of many who died on gulags or that got send there. Not even the CIA can spin history 360 degrees
For starters you could read actual socialist theory but I know you won’t. If you’re truly acting in good faith, give youtuber Hakim a listen. Or The Deprogram podcast. Or Second Thought. They have various videos covering a multitude of starter* topics and they provide sources with their claims.
Edit: if you’re looking for insights on how the CIA does spin history 180 degrees (360 is a circle, btw, you’d end up at the same point) then give The Jakarta Method a read.
NOT
THE
FUCKING
WIKEPEDIA LINKS 😭😭😭
I can’t with y’all anymore
Everybody knows that Wikipedia is literally unrefutable fact, especially on controversial or political topics. Why would someone lie or omit facts on the internet??? Next you’re going to tell me that I can’t trust CIA press releases too!!!
You can’t! Except the ones where they say Stalin was the best.
Usually Wikipedia is okay if, as it says, you use it as ‘a starting point for serious research, not an endpoint.’ The problem is that, in practice, roughly 95% of the people referencing it don’t use it this way and instead mistake it as a substitute for serious research.
It’s basically the Walmart of educational materials.
Everyone knows teachers love it when you use Wikipedia in school, it’s a real problem in some high schools because it’s a trick to get an easy A, if your teacher assigns you a topic for a paper you can just send them the wikipedia link for it and they’ll be forced to give you an A because you don’t actually need to do the work yourself in school
We have no choice but to abandon communism.
Why not?
Wikipedia is notoriously untrustworthy and gets brigades heavily by the CIA, especially on topics like this.
For better sources, use this. Look for gulags and the purges you mention and see what is written.
There’s just as much the CIA can patch, Wikipedia still provide a good account of famous historical events and plenty cross links, you can search for yourself and read the individual history of many who died on gulags or that got send there. Not even the CIA can spin history 360 degrees
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MKUltra
If you have even better sources to wikipedia that’s good but your link redirect to reddit and vague articles and even to wikipedia itself
For starters you could read actual socialist theory but I know you won’t. If you’re truly acting in good faith, give youtuber Hakim a listen. Or The Deprogram podcast. Or Second Thought. They have various videos covering a multitude of starter* topics and they provide sources with their claims.
Edit: if you’re looking for insights on how the CIA does spin history 180 degrees (360 is a circle, btw, you’d end up at the same point) then give The Jakarta Method a read.
For starter you could stay on topic
??? I am staying on topic. I’m giving you all these suggestions to check out. Or did you not expect an actual answer?