What We Must Learn From The Hungarian Communist Revolution Of 1919

Historians of twentieth century Europe, I have noticed, tend to gloss over or minimize the atrocities and crimes of leftists, anarchists, and communists. We hear constantly about the excesses of the right; and yet the left is portrayed as the perennial victim, never stepping beyond the boundaries of civilized conduct.

And yet nothing could be further from the truth. The growth of the far right in Europe after the First World War was often traceable to the disorder, chaos, and fear generated by leftist and communist crimes. In country after country, the pattern was the same: outside agents or internal traitors seeking to destabilize the societies in which they lived.

The reader will perceive that there is a direct line of descent from the communist-Bolshevist agitators of yesteryear and the militant social justice warrior (SJW) of today. They are cats of the same stripe. Both of them sought to undermine and destroy the societies in which they lived, and did not care much how they went about doing it.

We have recently discussed one such example, the Spartacist revolution in postwar Germany. We will now turn to another such example, that of the communist revolution in 1919 Hungary. It was the second communist republic to come into existence, after Russia; and while its longevity was mercifully brief, its advent was marked by vindictive violence and bloodshed.

The author of the 1919 Hungarian revolution was a cunning, treacherous man named Bela Kun. His birth name was Bela Kohen or Kohn, and he was born in 1886 in what is now Lelei, Romania. Sometime around 1904 he changed his last name to Kun.


Kun: A lying, murdering rat who hated European civilization and wanted to destroy it.

Before the First World War, he was engaged in work as a newspaper journalist in Austria-Hungary, much like the militant social justice warriors (SJWs) of today. He was known for his combative nature, and was apparently accused of embezzlement at one point.

He served in the military forces of Austria-Hungary in the First World War, but was captured by the Russians in 1916. When Russia became convulsed in revolution in 1917-1918, he willingly allowed himself to become an agent of the Communist International.

He was a committed communist and found its methods and promises attractive. He knew Lenin and approved of his brutal methods, and thought that exporting this brand of terror to the country of his birth would be a good thing.

The Bolsheviks sent him back to Hungary in 1918 with a large sum of money and several hundred cadres for the specific purpose of undertaking a coup. In this he was greatly helped by the post-war dislocation and chaos caused by the collapse of the old monarchy. Like a plague bacillus, he and his followers sought to infect a weakened society with an evil ideology that cloaked itself in the language of liberation.

His tactics were those of fear and intimidation: he and his group organized strikes, demonstrations, and employed the use of violence against dissenters. Hungary was in chaos and many in government were opposed to the Allies’ plans to redraw the country’s borders. At some point, Kun was asked to take part in a coalition government with the Social Democrats; his known ties to Soviet Russia were expected to be a useful card in negotiations with the Western allies. Kun promised that he could bring Russian support to a new Hungarian coalition government.

And here we see the truth illustrated in stark clarity once again: trying to appease or negotiate with SJW fanatics is a losing proposition. This proved to be the case with Kun in 1919.

As the price for his support, Kun demanded the declaration of a Soviet republic in Hungary, as well as the domination of the Social Democrats by the communists. Like fools, the traditional forces of the old order allowed a snake to enter the tent; and once there, the snake quickly took over.


Lenin talking to one of Kun’s ministers (named Szamuely) in 1919.

The Hungarian Soviet Republic was declared in March 1919. Kun was the dominant force in the new government and immediately embarked on a radical program, such as the nationalization of all private property. He used gangs of thugs known as the “Lenin Boys” to murder and terrorize anyone who was thought to be insufficiently enthusiastic for the regime. All the usual Bolshevist apparatus was brought into Hungary: secret tribunals, secret police, and revolutionary “courts.”

But events would soon spiral out of control. Hungary became involved in border disputes, then open war, with Romania and Czechoslovakia. Romania then invaded Hungary and marched on Budapest, deposing Kun and his retinue of flunkies in August 1919. The government had lasted only 133 days. The Soviet Red Army in Russia, too preoccupied with its own problems, could do little but offer rhetorical support for Kun.

But Kun’s blood-stained career was not over. He was briefly interned in Vienna, but later released as part of a prisoner exchange; thereafter, he found his way back to Russia, where he could find additional opportunities to commit violence and atrocities against innocents.

Kun participated in Russia’s civil war in the 1920s, and according to historians was directly responsible for the execution of about 50,000 White Russian prisoners and civilians (with the approval of Lenin). These were people who had been promised amnesty if they would surrender.

Kun later took charge of the Crimea, and there he undertook a vigorous program of murder, torture, and mass deportations. It is estimated that he supervised the execution of 60,000 to 70,000 Crimean inhabitants.

For the rest of the 1920s, he worked as an agent of the Comintern, traveling around Europe and trying to foment revolutions. One he organized in Germany ended in complete failure (the “March Action” program). Thereafter his credibility in communist circles waned; he was arrested in Vienna and deported to Russia. There he spent his time denouncing former comrades and planning future projects.

But history seems to have a perverse sense of humor, and Kun would eventually see some measure of justice. The advent of Joseph Stalin changed the game in Russia; he distrusted foreign communists, especially those with ties to the old Bolsheviks.

Around 1937, Kun was arrested, tortured, and shot by Stalin’s NKVD, for the stated reason of being a “counter-revolutionary terrorist.” So perished the diabolical and cruel engineer of the deaths of so many others, by the very hand of the people he had sought to elevate. There is a crude, but fitting, sort of justice in this outcome.

Readers may draw their own conclusions from the Bela Kun story, and what those lessons mean for the present day. At the very least, his career suggests the following: (1) making alliances with people of this sort is a useless exercise; (2) the vindictiveness and cruelty of such people cannot be underestimated; (3) physical force is often needed to confront them.

Read More:  5 Insights From A Decade In Higher Learning

93 thoughts on “What We Must Learn From The Hungarian Communist Revolution Of 1919”

  1. Little known fact: Bella Kun’s gang of thugs were also known as the “squeak and shine boys” for their fetishistic affection for leather gear … see the photo above with Lenin

      1. Lol blue hair, piercings and tatoos. Not that any of those things in and of themselves are ‘bad’, but it is a tell tale sign.althought there are many closeted sjw’s.

  2. The first step is always to disarm the “Great Unwashed”. Never, ever register or give up your guns. Mao’s China, Stalin’s Soviet Union, Pol Pot’s Killing Fields, or Castro’s Cuba is always the result. It’s interesting to see that Europeans are once again attempting to arm themselves to combat the islam invasion. I wish them the best!

  3. It’s too late. The left and even conservatives have signed a pact with the devil(represented by the extreme left = SJWs, feminists and so forth). History repeats itself. A big war will happen in our lifetime.

  4. In 1919, Georg Lukacs became Deputy Commissar for Culture in the short-lived Bolshevik Bela Kun regime in Hungary. He immediately set plans in motion to de-Christianize Hungary. Reasoning that if Christian sexual ethics could be undermined among children, then both the hated patriarchal family and the Church would be dealt a crippling blow. Lukacs launched a radical sex education program in the schools. Sex lectures were organized and literature handed out which graphically instructed youth in free love (promiscuity) and sexual intercourse while simultaneously encouraging them to deride and reject Christian moral ethics, monogamy, and parental and church authority. All of this was accompanied by a reign of cultural terror perpetrated against parents, priests, and dissenters.
    Hungary’s youth, having been fed a steady diet of values-neutral (atheism) and radical sex education while simultaneously encouraged to rebel against all authority, easily turned into delinquents ranging from bullies and petty thieves to sex predators, murderers, and sociopaths.

    stolen from : http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/02/cultural_marxism.html#ixzz3wJq6prQu

      1. Hungary enjoyed the unique privilege of undergoing two bloody communist dictatorships, both of which were Jewish-led. Bela Kun was their first butcher. When Bela’s regime collapsed in 1919, hundreds of his Jewish compatriots fled with him to Russia, among whom were Matyas Rakosi and Erna Gera. In 1945, Matyas Rakosi was installed as the supreme dictator of Hungary, with Erno Gera and Zoltan Vas occupying positions number two and three.

        1. Actually. Jews completely acculturated – indeed, assimilated – and had enthusiastically ‘Magrayrized’ in Hungary. Allied with the Hungarian elites of the time, Jews were strongly opposed to the Kunites.

        2. “Jews completely acculturated – indeed, assimilated – and had enthusiastically ‘Magrayrized’ in Hungary.”
          No, they weren’t, or else they’d have been Christians and not Jews.

        3. By that logic, most Americans have not assimilated. Protestants refused to consider Catholics or Mormons and Christians. In the US, we solved the problem with every one going ‘protiform’ and creating a national civic religion.
          For details, look at “The Way of the WASP,” by Richard Brookhiser.
          Richard Brookhiser.

  5. “In country after country, the pattern was the same: outside agents or internal traitors seeking to destabilize the societies in which they lived.”
    Yes, this was something that Augusto Pinochet and his men understood very well. Salvador Allende invited an estimated 31,000 Cuban and Soviet bloc operatives and terrorists to Chile. These included Castro’s top KGB-trained terrorist spymasters, Antonio De La Guardia and Manuel”Barbarroja” Pineiro.” Not to be outdone, Allende also allowed hundreds of Soviet personnel like KGB operatives Viktor Efremov, Vasili Stepanov and Nikolai Kotchanov to assist in the coming Terror for Chileans.
    By 1973, 60% of Chile’s arable land had been stolen by Allende’s Marxist regime, often with the aid of Cuba-trained death squads. Death squads were already roaming the lands murdering recalcitrants to the theft of their lands and the denials of their freedom.
    History has repeatedly shown to anyone with eyes in their head and an IQ higher than an eggplant that a people will tolerate abuse, robbery and rape from their own…for a while. But they will not tolerate it from foreigners.
    The men here at ROK and the “alt-right” are well versed in the weasel words and outright lies of SJWs, but let’s just take them at their word in those rare moments when they’re candid, shall we?
    “In the final analysis only armed conflict will decide who is the victor!” said Allende’s governmental ally, Oscar Guillermo Garreton. “The class struggle always entails armed conflict. Understand me, the global strategy is always accomplished through arms!”
    Allende’s deputy economic minister, Sergio Ramos, didn’t mince words either: “It’s evident,” he proclaimed in mid-1973, “that the transition to socialism will first require a dictatorship of the proletariat!”
    “Stalin was a banner of creativity, of humanism and an edifying picture of peace and heroism!” mewled Salvador Allende during a eulogy in 1953 to the Soviet mass-murderer whose crimes dwarfed Hitler’s 3 times, not to mention assisting his LEFTIST pal Hitler in beginning the Second World War. “Everything he did, he did in service of the people. Our father Stalin has died but in remembering his example our affection for him will cause our arms to grow strong towards building a grand tomorrow—to insure a future in memory of his grand example!”
    Not the paragon of democracy or the harmless beacon of freedom that lying SJW vermin would have us believe. And we know this because the totalitarian left is smarting from the pimp slap smackdown delivered by the stone faced Pinochet and his hard as nails crew. The cuckservatives love to marvel at the 180 degree turn that Chile underwent, but the snivelling cowards whine about the ruthless efficiency that evicted the commies from power, and made the economic miracle possible to begin with.
    And that’s what makes Pinochet’s coup so remarkable. He didn’t give a damn what the world thought. His first and only concern was the well-being of his people. Knowing how incompetent and limp-wristed the US State Department was (nothing changed since then), the Chilean army didn’t even inform them of their intentions.
    I’m surprised Curtius hasn’t penned a piece about Pinochet, although this piece was first rate.

      1. I’m sure people know he was an open communist and his country got aid from the USSR, people are bitching because compared to Pinochet he was an angel. Not to mention the fuckers who supported Pinochet basically sabotaged Chile’s economy because of their class issues.

        1. You sound mestizo. I’m sorry that your Cuban run death squads were not enough to destroy chile’s whites who retook their country from your kgb agent president.

        2. I’m African actually, and I’m pretty sure in the 1970s most of Cuba was still white. Also it’s funny thar you say that Chile’s whites retook their country when most of Chile’s whites seemed to support Allende’s Popular Unity government, and when the Pinohetists decided to fuck over Chile’s natives, you know the Mapuche.

        3. Actually they didn’t, dindu. “Class” in Chile really means race. The top “classes” are white and surprisingly pre-WW II German (post WW II went to Argentina), and get browner and browner the lower you go. The “Classes” that wanted their land, assets, and right to self determination back were overwhelmingly white.
          And LOL! on 70s Cuba being white. Who do you think the darker communist races expelled? My guess is that you’ve never even visited Florida. All of the “Cubans” there are basically the descendants of white western Mediterranean countries.
          But keep drinking the Guardian and Regressive Left Kool Aid.

        4. LOL cuck. Whites, who want ‘their’ land back, geez the Mapuche would love to have a word with you about ‘land’ ownerships. According to you, whites trying to keep stolen land are “keeping” it from the people who worked it and lived on it for centuries. Literally, this is what you said.
          And yes 70s cuba was still pretty white, given most of the Cuban population pre-revolution was white. According to you, most of the communist revolutionaries in Cuba weren’t white LOL.
          Keep on justifying shooting poets because they’re communists and sending death squads around to douse people in gasoline.

        5. Lol nigger. I’m sure the mestizos would also happily give up the productivity of the whites as well. Oh wait …
          You are definitely living up to your continents average IQ.

        6. You literally said the Mestizos *did* want tht but the glorious white race saved itself with Pinochetist death squads, peckerwood.
          It’s funny that you don’t deny the land is stolen from natives and try to say blacks have small IQs for pointing that out.

        7. I’m pretty sure blacks did not have things like railways or even buildings made of stone before whites came into Africa.

  6. Heres my take: Cultural Marxists, ahem… your average “Hail Obama” liberal, doesn’t understand the world and doesn’t give a fuck. Liberals are stuck in a petulant, childish fit of whiny anger about the world and refuse to part with an absurd, idealized world view. My friends that are still liberals in their late 20’s (most of them) are infantile emotionally and mentally. This childish worldview leads them to believe that lying, manipulating, breaking the law, are all noble as long as they are committed in the name of liberalism.

  7. too many people still see communism as either ‘well-meaning but historically inclined to go horribly wrong’ or as completely unrelated to modern progressivism. Given the numbers of dead involved such ‘charity’ is absurd. I dislike the fact that communism and nazism are sometimes seen as alternative creeds: in terms of evil there is little if anything between them: they were both murderous totalitarian creeds that were responsible for many tens of millions of deaths, with communisms only distinction being to dominate in the numbers game on that count. It is absolutely right to responsibly make the link between the murderous SJWs of yesterday and the more sof-focussed but equally intolerant and increasingly aggressive “progressivism” of today – but the sense of history and memory in the young today in particular is poor – they cannot see the connexion. Even today there are literal marxists everywhere, none-of-whom seem to feel any sense of shame for the millions slaughtered in the name of a creed they still profess. French philosophers like Badieu still get to say that communism was basically a good idea that went a bit wrong, but that we should still keep trying until we get it right (the communist hypothesis) and what’s more gets acclaimed as the worlds greatest philosopher as a result, while historians like Hobsbawm admit that they would have found it acceptable if only about 20 million had died in Russia – is his reputation in tatters as a result? On the contrary card-carrying marxists and communists abound in westeren universities and being a marxist academic is more likely to advance your career rather than to hinder it.
    I don’t believe in banning ideas, but where ideas are evil, and have been demonstrably shown to have evil effects, then those ideas should be shamed. To be a communist should be a status worse than being a paedophile

    1. Not only that, but there is the “No true Scotsman” fallacy many fall into. Point out what Pol Pot, Castro, Ho Chi Minh, Stalin, etc. have done alone, they’ll counter that “Oh, well they didn’t implement it the way Marx wanted to.”
      They’re so brainwashed about progressionism they refuse to look at modern history.

      1. very true. People need to see Marx as the source of the evil not as someone whose ideas have been mis-understood or mis-applied. He wasn’t a nice guy

        1. I got into an argument with a guy a few days ago who said “if you’ve ever read anything from Marx, you’ll know it’s superior to capitalism……sadly no Marxist has ever been in power”.
          Having read Marx, knowing his basic life story and being able to cite a dozen examples of terrible Marxist leaders, my head exploded from the autism.

        2. Appalling level of disconnect from reality, but quite typical of how the left manages to divorce a creed it still believes in, in part or whole, from the murderous reality of its implementation. Marx himself makes this possible ironically though as he can come aross as quite the humanitarian

      2. Indeed. Although, I wouldn’t call it brainwashing, but merely a naive hope. The naive make the best adherents to any ideology.

    2. Hitler called himself a Marxist and his political party was called the Socialist German workers’ party

      1. the nazis should certainly be seen as of the left – the association of nazism with right wing politics is arguably left wing propaganda enabled by Hitler’s outward hatred of communism. I’ve just read that Hitler claimed in private that the “the whole of national socialism” was based on marx. Arguably the real difference between communism proper and national socialism is that the former is internationalist (think trotsky) whereas the latter is as the title suggests nationalist. The experience of soviet russia obscures this somewhat as under stalin communism became communism in one country. Obviously there were differences from classical ‘economic’ marxism but that could also be said to be true of many communist variations

        1. what do you mean by that? i’m actually curious. i’m no expert on economics, but i’ve come to believe that the current US economy is very similar to the nazi german model.

        2. It’s similar but it’s it’s missing some of the important elements: http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/gcsebitesize/history/mwh/germany/economicrev1.shtml
          We’re not fully employed, unions, strikes, etc exist, money isn’t as invested in the economy, Jews control media and the banks, women are almost half of the workforce.
          They may have had longer work hours and lower wages but everyone had a job. In the US system, these jobs would be outsourced. Unions, strikes, and such give more to the individual, and with higher wages+benefits come less jobs. Jews controlling public opinion and women working leads to a degradation of society. Christianity being subverted (no morals, higher crime, degeneracy) and women working breaks the family unit.

        3. i’ve never heard anything very bad said about mr hitlers economics. Albert Speer should probably get some credit for that

        4. its not true,the mai difference is that hitler and national socialism still allowed for individual success and wealth albiet once it came secondary to the needs of the state where as communism its all state run ,might sound subtle but its a distinct difference and one i like,i like equality but its foolish to pretend we all have the same abilities and deserve the saem rewards

        5. so does communist china today. We’ve known communism and national socialism were variations on big state totalitarianism since Hannah Arendt. What Hitler’s secret admiration for Marxism tells us is is why, once the variable of nationalism is allowed for, the two systems are so similar.

        6. no i dont think communist china is the best example,its far more like capitalism in the letting of individuals take precedence than national socialism where the state is most certainly to the fore, china seems to leave individuals have their own personal fiefdoms, and thats like saying if my auntie had bollocks she’d be y uncle,the variance of nationalism and what it entails is a huge difference not to mention the state/individual dynamic i mentioned, their are similarities bewteen both but distinct enough differences that i would support one but not another

        7. I agree that as a variable nationalism changes everything (it’s the difference between there being an inside and outside insofar as communism is theoretically inclusive) but that also reveals the state as the constant in the equation. The state in communism is supposed to be a means to an end but oftens seems to become an end in its self, at which point the difference between something like national socialism can seem almost superficial – especially if you consider the de facto reality of one-state communism, which often becomes highly nationalistic even if that doesn’t have a racial foundation. I’m not saying they’re the same but that the similarities seem almost greater than the differences.

        8. yeah i can see what you are saying and its a great point,i have often wondered at the differences and i think its enough but only if you concentrate on it sufficiently,maybe im coloring it with my personal preference and its at times like this i think none of it matters at all,not how they rule only who rules !!

        1. Communism like democracy, socialism, or republicanism is an utopian ideal. The key word is utopian. These ideologies can never be truly realized or actualized. The people who fail to see that are the same people who would bring that onslaught about. The biggest hindrance to utopian ideals: human nature. So the ‘best ‘ socio-political system would be based on ideals but would also take into account human nature; and who among us is wise enough to realized that system?–it is an open-ended question.

    3. too many people still see communism as either ‘well-meaning but historically inclined to go horribly wrong’ or as completely unrelated to modern progressivism.

      Russians understand the connection. When they threw off communism, they didn’t become Western European progressives. Instead they retraditionalized in ways that Leo Tolstoy and Fyodor Dostoevsky would have recognized.
      Ironically the Russian Cosmists, who show up in transhumanist circles, don’t seem to realize that their allegedly “futuristic” philosophy derives from a heretical interpretation of Russian Orthodox Christianity, and it incorporates a religious way of thinking.

      1. Very interesting comment. I hadn’t heard of the russian cosmists, although I do recall reading about futurist ideas contemporary with the revolution. I will read up about this when I get the chance.
        The russians are fortunate to have tolstoy and dostoyevsky, two giants of literature, although personally I prefer Dostoyevsky not least because of the fact that the tackles nihilist and revolutionary ideas that would eventually lead to the bolshevik revolution

        1. Apparently the January issue of Harper’s magazine has an article about Cosmism, “Everything That Rises,” by John Crowley. Harpers.com has it behind a paywall, so I’ll have to find a print copy to read it.

        2. I’ll see if I can find it There are some youtube videos on the subject, but against I haven’t checked them out. Strange that searching on the subject seems to produce on the one hand someone like Nikolai Fyodorovich Fyodorov an orthodox christian and on the other someone like Lunacharsky an atheist communist

    4. The hellish vapors rise and fill the mind,
      Until I go mad and my heart is completely changed.
      You see this sword?
      The Prince of Darkness I sold it.
      For me it marks the compass and gives the signs.
      Increasingly daring, I play the dance of death
      From the poem The Violinist, write for Karl Marx.

    5. “Notably, the incident has sent leftists into a tizzy, with major figures such as Montel Williams calling for President Obama to send in the military to clear out the militiamen with “shoot-to-kill” orders.”
      That’s from article here in RoK.
      Left must be annihilated without mercy.

  8. The central conceit in Communism teaching on this issue goes right back to Karl Marx’s infamous claim that it’s justifiable to use violence and force to bring about a revolution that would led to the ideal society (or paradise/utopia) where all citizens are treated equally and respected as full human beings.
    Unfortunately, the bitter truth of this credo was fully implemented in Russia where the equal society of Lenin/Stalin was a realm where an estimated 20 million people were liquidated in the day of equality. A substantially higher number were sent into “internal exile” for sometimes up to 30 years in places like the hell on earth of Magadan in the far north east of Russia. There were even cases of parents who were arrested because their children passed on information to the authorities (about getting extra food) who were then hailed as patriots of the workers paradise. The whole system was based on fear at all levels, nobody could ever be trusted, on cunning, on collective indoctrination at every part of the system (education. workplace, the arts, the media) on the abolition of anything different including of course religion or travel to another State.
    Nazism although clearly a different type of collective mania wasn’t so much about destroying ruthlessly all of the remnants of the pre-existing bourgeoisie society, but rather, about allowing them to remain under the State’s eye. Communism wasn’t merely about controlling these institutions, it was about destroying and liquidating every person, idea and organisation without mercy that opposed its ideology of “equality” for the common good of the people.
    From a Russian perspective Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn books are still powerful readings on this dark and terrifying period in Russian history. It’s amazing that there were nevertheless so many people who actually managed to survive 20 year sentences in the camp systems set up by Stalin.

    1. >Stalin killed 20 million people
      hahaha, no.
      > There were even cases of parents who were arrested because their children passed on information to the authorities (about getting extra food) who were then hailed as patriots of the workers paradise.
      The example (child ratted out the parent due to saying anti-soviet things) did not happen, AFAIK it was a made up thing from stalinist propaganda.
      >Solzhensityn is a perfectly valid source
      lol no. he has a lot of usefulness, but dont take anything he says as the bible.

  9. http://madamenoire.com/606673/pop-mom-mary-kay-letourneau/#disqus_thread
    I Can’t Believe It, the Left wing Feminist Machine just can’t get over this story, First it was Barbra Walters, Now this! It’s Almost Hilarious how if it had been a 35 yr old Male teacher and a 12 yr old female student impregnated ( reverse Circumstance) the Feminist’s most definitely would be calling for his disembowelment and Castration no Doubt, but since it’s a 35 yr old Career woman and a 12 yr old male student it’s now becoming a Love story!…In truth I probably wouldn’t have given a Damn if I was Smashing a hot teacher at 12 yrs old, but the Double Standard needs to be noted.

    1. There is quite the double standard. Men lose women win in this fucked up society.
      Edit: I want to make sure that I am talking about statutory rape. If a man were to do that it would be 25 to life. Women get lesser sentences. Like 13 years and mental rehab.or just rehab. Like rehab could take the preditorial out of her.

  10. (4) Jews and other foreigners will not magically become identical to natives regardless of length of residence and will disproportionately provide the leadership and ground troops for fringe left authoritarian movements devoted to destroying traditional society and enslaving the natives.

  11. ” Kun was arrested, tortured, and shot by Stalin’s NKVD”
    Stalin’s thinking: “Anyone who wants anything to do with me must be an asshole”

  12. The supreme arrogance combined with the total absense of logic and sheer stupidity of the SJW movement leaves physical force as the only viable option to counter them with. They cannot be reasoned with or debated with because the core ideology behind the SJW is not based on logic or reason. So much so that taking a contradictory position to their belief system will only get you a hysterical, unreasonable and often times violent response in turn. Look at how many people have been doxxed, harassed, lost their jobs, and even in some cases have been openly assaulted in public for daring to express a viewpoint that deviates from the SJW mob’s accepted norm.
    Just as you cannot reason with a Muslim extremist frothing at the mouth over his Islamic beliefs, so too can you not deal with an SJW (or a Feminist) frothing at the mouth over imagined offenses and “mysoginy”. To this end, the rabid SJW extremists should be dealt with the same way that we deal with Muslim terrorists. Willful, wanton stupidity and ignorance knows no corrective action other than force.

    1. The lynch mob phenomenon is American as apple pie, unfortunately. It is a degenerate form of populist democracy, defended by the likes of William Jennis Bryan.

    2. “Willful, wanton stupidity and ignorance knows no corrective action other than force.”
      I would agree. As far back as assyria force is the only defining factor in humans relations. The ancients knew it until reciently the western world knew it. Only to our downfall we will not know it. Ironic, I believe, is the correct word.

      1. I’d like to see an article on the Holodomer and/or a story of how the many Eastern European communist dictators met their fates

    1. Lenin was not Jewish or of Jewish descent while Kun well that unkosher Pig was as Jewish as Ted Kennedy was at being Catholic. Many Communists were of Jewish descent but hey a lot of liberals come from Catholic families so that just proves every group has vermin that they really are not responsible for.

        1. None of the sources I have come across say that though I have been looking him up for years. They simply list him as Russian, that his father was a peasant who worked his way up to the lowest rank of the Russian Nobility and that his older brother was executed by the Czar’s secret police for being part of a radical organization bent on overthrowing the Government.

  13. I have a really hard time imagining all the liberal fruitcake ‘men’, purple-haired dykes, trannys, and minorities organizing into coherent fighting force to commit large scale genocide.
    Maybe that’s why they’re making it legal for non-citizens to become police officers….to attack American citizens.

  14. Thanks for a very good article. The time between the world wars is indeed interesting and a man can learn a lot by taking the time to study this period.
    If I may, could I ask for some references for this article? Partly because I am generally interested in reading more on my own, and also as a tool in coming debates, where sources to back up facts about the truth of the red menace is useful.

  15. “We hear constantly about the excesses of the right; and yet the left is
    portrayed as the perennial victim, never stepping beyond the boundaries
    of civilized conduct.”
    So true!!!

  16. Besides his many crimes the worst thing about Bela Kun and his colleagues much like the crimes of Trotsky, Rosa Luxumberg and the communists in Berlin and Bavaria is that these unkosher Pigs were later used by the Nazis and others to justify their crimes against all Jews, the persecution and mass murder of innocent people who had nothing to do with them or if they had been still around would have been themselves persecuted and murdered by these unkosher Pigs.

  17. There is one thing that requires correction: it wasn’t the Romanians that deposed him. There is nothing good the Hngarians can thank the Romanians for. We had a brilliant admiral named Miklós Horthy, he took over after that nightmare and it was him who chased them away.
    I’m Hungarian. And I cannot describe the hatred I feel towards these subhuman scums. We have them (largly) to thank for losing 2/3s (yes, TWO THIRDS) of our territory after WW1. If there is any justice in this universe they are all rottening in hell for eternity.You might be interested in the fact that he was jewish. Along with all his ministers. The PM (read: a puppet) was the only one who wasn’t. People said wryly the reason was that the communist rats needed someone to sign the death sentences on sabbath’s day as well.

  18. Kun, or “Kohen’s Eskimo ancestry will not have passed the discerning reader by. Like most of the early Bolsheviks, particularly the most blood-stained, he was of that ilk. How the hell Stalin managed to wrest power from them I’ll never know.
    The bloody line of these early Bolshevik murderers can be traced through to today’s “neocons”, who have caused the deaths of millions this millenium in order to attempt to gain control over certain societies. It goes without saying that the majority of the neocons are of the same Eskimo vintage as Kun. I agree that they need to be opposed by all means.

    1. ” It goes without saying that the majority of the neocons are of the same Eskimo vintage as Kun. I agree that they need to be opposed by all means.”
      Truer words were seldom spoken.

  19. Communists are the biggest scum of this Earth, if I ever see some bitch wearing a commie shirt, I will push him like the bitch he is.

  20. ” So perished the diabolical and cruel engineer of the deaths of so many others, by the very hand of the people he had sought to elevate.” – This is the single “redeeming” aspect of Communism.. that some of the acolytes (but unfortunately not most) were served their own dish eventually by those more cunning and more evil than they were.

  21. Or in other words, it takes radical tactics to defeat radicals, because they cannot be appeased.
    Well-done. I had visited this in writing my Year Zero book.
    You’re right in that most of the ideologues have had distinctly leftist leanings, based on ideas of “progress.” It goes back much further than this.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *