WWII and communist subversion of the west

I’ve independently noticed some of this myself. After WWI there was a spread of communism into places like Russia, which communism was directly exported there from Germany. After WWII there was a much further and more massive spread of communism all around the world, for example China, Venezuela, Cuba, Cambodia which all eventually fell to communism. And it is also after WWII that the left started gaining traction and becoming more radical and powerful in America, probably in Europe too.

Her argument here, part of it, is that WWII was basically designed to destabilize Central Europe and weaken it to allow communism to infiltrate. Aligning with Stalin for example could be seen as either a desperate necessity or as something far more calculated and intentional. But the fact remains that after every “Great War” there was a subsequent massive spread of communist ideology that was able to take over politics and governance as well as social institutions.

Now today, no one I know takes communism seriously at all, and many people even think it’s pretty cool and “rebellious” in a good way. Likewise, almost nobody I know feels any of that default interest or curiosity or even reverence for the idea of capitalism.

Thus, communist ideology and sympathy as a deliberate tool of ‘the elite’ to destabilize otherwise free people and subject them to authoritarianism and central government power. I mean Bernie Sanders actually had a decent shot at becoming president, that tells you all you need to know.

Communism or Internationalism has indeed absolutely benefited from both World Wars. Its possible that it was indeed a setup or at least that conspiracy from Communist angles was part of the causes of WWII.

There is a mysterious story about Lenin train ride from Germany to Russia, just before be "did his thing" let's say. I've always wanted to see a movie about this train ride.


Capitalism requires thought. Communism doesn't, feelings are enough. Enough said.

Yes, and one of her main arguments (author and researcher in the above video) is that WWII was deliberately prolonged so that Stalin could get military supplies in positions to invade east into China and west into Europe, and that if the war had ended when Japan was actually trying to surrender (which surrenders the Allies rejected at the time) and a policy of containment had been done with Germany, such as the policy of containment as was applied to Soviet Russia for example all during the Cold War but never considered for Germany near the end of WWII, then basically the Soviets would never have been able to expand east and west, would never have been able to develop the Iron Curtain.

She also points out that American military equipment, weapons, food, trucks etc., and uranium and supplies to make nuclear weapons, were sent in the hundreds of millions to Soviet Russia during the war, even while American troops were facing undersupply across the war theater. She also points out that some of this American military equipment was used against American prisoners by the Soviets. And she makes the amazing observation, which I had never thought about before, that after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor America did not declare war on Japan and start attacking in the Pacific, as would have made sense and as the American military was preparing for immediately after the attack... rather we redirected most military efforts against Germany. And we opened up a second front against Germany not through Africa, which would have been possible, but rather through central Europe; and that it was basically Stalin's goal to get America and Japan to destroy each other while laying as much waste as possible to central Europe. And then of course after the war was over, Stalin conquered so much of eastern Europe already, North Korea and parts of China too, half of Germany. And the Allies basically had no problem with that.

Regarding the communism thing, one point of disagreement I have with the author and with Stefan is that communism is some kind of external threat against western civilization. Rather, communism is a decidedly western idea. It was created in the west by western people, and it is either loved or despised by western people and has been spread, from the west, all around the world. Even the idea that Russia is not part of the west, is not part of Europe, is wrong as I see it. Russia is part of the west and should be considered part of Europe, even back during and after the Soviet revolution.

So I see communism as a kind of self-testing of the west. Part of the great power of "the west" is how we battle ideas against other ideas, this is philosophy; communism and capitalism, loosely defined as ideologies or ways of thinking and ways of being, ways of governing etc., are just another example of this. Communism and even the Soviets, before they collapsed, were not some external enemy against us, rather there were aspects of ourselves with which we were engaged in philosophical battles for truth. Communism still contains truths, or rather it appeals to certain truths and acts as a counter perspective, a kind of mirror as well as a kind of psychological strange attractor that reveals a lot about the human mind, emotion, governance, all that.

Its an interesting or at least troubling perspective, but I must note that there isn't any proof of the main issues, nor referenced sources to verify these things, such as that massive amount of capital funnelled into the USSR.
Also I dont know what is meant with the statement that the US did not instantly declare war on Japan - after all the declaration is on record



And the US did engage - of course only 60.000 US soldiers died in the Pacific theatre - not wanting to disrespect their sacrifice -
but the notion that the US helped the USSR needs a lot of proof, also since well over 10 million Russians died in the war against the nazis.

Her propose that a containment policy would have been possible or justified like with the USSR speaks of an ignorance of what was happening under German occupation - certainly I would not be here had that been the strategy of course, which for this woman might not be an issue, I realize - but in general, containment is what you do when you can't defeat an enemy. To contain Germany would basically be what Hitler constantly went for - he grabbed another piece of land and then went to aggressive "diplomacy" to make sure no vengeance was coming.

Ive often read that the US was more sympathetic to Germany than to Russia back then - there I an obscure story that Alesister Crowley in the capacity of British spy wrote infuriating articles promoting nazism from within the US to make the population aware of what nazism was. It is said this might have flipped the US from nazi-tolerant to considering open enmity. I would guess this was happening end '30s.

What is certain is that Hitler and Stalin had a pact which the US and Britain feared with reason, until suddenly Hitler decided to invade Russia. Stalin stayed in his room for several days and nights, allowing the German forces to get deep into the cold winter, where they found their limits, at Stalingrad, on the day my father was born.

WWII Europe is of course an area of history I know of more than I want. I know that Communists in all occupied countries were the only hearths of resistance against the nazis. It is certain that without communism, nazism would have prevailed here. That is beyond any question. So the question becomes: was that worth it?
For me, for my existence, the answer is objectively yes. But for a lot of people it would be no.

Any case, what remains is the question of proof of these US materials and capital being sent into Russia. Absent that proof Ill be forced to disregard the idea until it is at least somewhat verified.

”In total, the U.S. deliveries through Lend-Lease amounted to $11 billion in materials: over 400,000 jeeps and trucks; 12,000 armored vehicles (including 7,000 tanks, about 1,386[41] of which were M3 Lees and 4,102 M4 Shermans);[42] 11,400 aircraft (4,719 of which were Bell P-39 Airacobras)[43] and 1.75 million tons of food.[44]

Roughly 17.5 million tons of military equipment, vehicles, industrial supplies, and food were shipped from the Western Hemisphere to the USSR, 94% coming from the US. For comparison, a total of 22 million tons landed in Europe to supply American forces from January 1942 to May 1945. It has been estimated that American deliveries to the USSR through the Persian Corridor alone were sufficient, by US Army standards, to maintain sixty combat divisions in the line.[45][46]

The United States delivered to the Soviet Union from October 1, 1941 to May 31, 1945 the following: 427,284 trucks, 13,303 combat vehicles, 35,170 motorcycles, 2,328 ordnance service vehicles, 2,670,371 tons of petroleum products (gasoline and oil) or 57.8 percent of the High-octane aviation fuel,[24] 4,478,116 tons of foodstuffs (canned meats, sugar, flour, salt, etc.), 1,911 steam locomotives, 66 Diesel locomotives, 9,920 flat cars, 1,000 dump cars, 120 tank cars, and 35 heavy machinery cars. Provided ordnance goods (ammunition, artillery shells, mines, assorted explosives) amounted to 53 percent of total domestic production.[24] One item typical of many was a tire plant that was lifted bodily from the Ford Company's River Rouge Plant and transferred to the USSR. The 1947 money value of the supplies and services amounted to about eleven billion dollars.[47] “

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease


Yes the Nazis were terrible. But the Soviets were little better end ended up killing even more people even if you just count their death camp gulags. Also you’ll note in that article above the early mention of Harry Hopkins, who this researcher Diana from the video in the OP claims was a Soviet spy. I see there is a lot of info about this online by a quick search.

On Japan, it would have made sense to move to Japan across the Pacific after Pearl Harbor, but as noted in the video most of US military was redirected instead into the Atlantic. And I am sympathetic to the theory that Stalin really wanted the US to delay the war’s end and also to attack through Europe into Germany, in order to decimate Europe and to prolong the war so Stalin could take as much of Eastern Europe and east and south of Russia as possible. That just makes perfect sense. And I do know that the Japanese had been trying to surrender for years before we nuked them.