Talk:Decommunization
Add topic| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Decommunization article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the subject of the article. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 2 years  |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
"Political Cleansing" and other issues
[edit]This article has a long of original research in general, however one facet that stands out to me is the inclusion of Political Cleansing in bold formatting in the main section of the article. The article's usage of this triggering term seems to suggest that the removal of communist symbols is inherently negative, while in many examples this may not necessarily be the case. At least when discussing the removal of Leninist, Stalinist and Maoist symbols, I don't think it's fair to equate this "political cleansing" to real-life political cleansing that non-autocratic movements face in the context of democratic backsliding and dictatorship.
Furthermore, the section "Purging and prosecution of former communist officials" and its rather odd conclusion of an anecdote from Barbara Harff about no communist nation being convicted of genocide seems unneeded at best and tone-deaf at worst. It is largely known that the Khmer Rouge committed genocide from 1975 to 1979, and many well-regarded historians have argued that the Holodomor within Ukraine was a genocide performed by the Soviet Union in the 1930s. This anecdote is only one example of an entire deluge of inappropriate comments spread throughout the article, as if one or more editors had inserted them to make the article more sympathetic towards self-described communist regimes that now see themselves as the "victims" of a "political cleansing."
Building off concerns about original research within this article, many off-hand comments seemingly defending communist regimes are present. When covering Stephen Holmes' review of decommunization within former East Germany, the inclusion of the sentence "After the initial desire "to root out the reds" came a realization that massive punishment is wrong and finding only some guilty is hardly justice" is completely inappropriate. This violates Wikipedia's guidelines about neutral coverage, as the anecdote is worded and positioned in such a way where a casual reader may assume it is a fact being stated. As such, this comment and others like it should be removed from this article, and more appropriate comments and anecdotes should be added. Royz-vi Tsibele (talk) 02:12, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
- The Khmer Rouge wasn't communist, and the "Holodomor" as you call it was not a genocide. Nice try, but next time don't spread misinformation. 172.58.56.88 (talk) 18:01, 4 October 2025 (UTC)
- Ohhh nevermind, according to your bio & userboxes, you use Wikipedia as a means to spread disinformation. I hope you delete your account. 172.58.56.88 (talk) 18:02, 4 October 2025 (UTC)
- Responding to a post I made over a year and a half ago and commenting on my talk page, just to push vanguardist bullshit? Please touch grass and get a life. Royz-vi Tsibele (talk) 22:34, 4 October 2025 (UTC)