I’ve always gotta wonder where the fuck the dust cover went when I see pictures of people using/holding AKs without them. They aren’t exactly small or something you take off very often, pretty hard to lose
A lot of them don’t seem to have it for some reason. Don’t know if it’s made like that or if they just break and end up getting removed or what but I’ve seen a few cases where police have confiscated guns off people and a lot of the time they never seem to have the covers on.
I did wonder if perhaps it’s a different version of the gun. I know there’s like 9,000 different variants made across different decades so possibly they decided it isn’t worth the extra weight or manufacturing cost.
The rifle in the picture is almost certainly a PM md. 65. I assure you they were made with dust covers. I have never seen a variation of a factory produced AK made without a dust cover.
A more likely, although still somewhat silly explanation is that sometimes AK dust covers can be tricky to get back on for someone inexperienced with them. Somebody may just give up in frustration and leave it off after disassembling and attempting to reassemble it.
Actual antifa
It’s anti-Authoritarianism. Branding every awful dictatorship as facism helps no one.
Communism and fascism are not the same thing. They are opposite ends of the political spectrum.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_fascism
Red fascism was a term coined by actual leftists (the original coining was by a Marxist) but largely co-opted by liberals and cryptofascists alike for their anti-communist rhetoric in the Cold War period.
There’s no particular reason to think this guy is against totalitarianism in general though, even if you acknowledge the term monarchists and fascists aren’t antifa for fighting red fascists.
There’s also no particular reason to think he wasn’t an anarchist. Or a liberal. Or literally anything besides a Ceausescu supporter.
He was an anti-communist living in Romania and being given quite a lot of reasons to be so, thus the near immediate 1989 Romanian Revolution when the Soviets fell, and that’s where our knowledge on his politics ends.
Hell, half the revolutionaries were communists themselves, nearly the entire military defected after the minister of defense was assumedly executed for refusing to give orders to fire on protestors.
Both pretty authoritarian, shitty ideologies tho.
Communism is fine. People are shitty tho. They tend to ruin everything, including capitalism.
Wrong. People aren’t shitty. The power to exploit turns people shitty. Power corrupts people. Hierarchy enforces a rule of shittiness, an opportunity and almost need to exploit. Eliminate the exploitative hierarchy and the concept of people being generally shitty would disappear.
Communism never seems to really be done properly though like sure people are a problem and they ruin it but the necessary checks and balances never seem to be put in place to actually prevent the corruption from happening.
The USSR never really got as far as properly implementing the philosophy. They did the first bits which are very open to corruption but then never finished off with all the extra bits of policy.
It’s like capitalism but with no worker rights, environmental protections, or safety laws.
As long as educated and wealthy people who don’t want to hand over their wealth exist communism will fail. If you “get rid” of these people your society is left weaker due to brain drain and those who remain are left worse off. Imagine being super intelligent and generating vast wealth with your labour and intellect then being forced to hand it all over and watching it get wasted by the government on projects you know will fail and given to lazy unintelligent people who enjoy all the benefits of your work while you get nothing more than them in return for your extra contribution
I thought the USSR wasn’t communist?
In the same way the USA isn’t a democracy, but they were “doing the communism” still
That simply shows a misunderstanding of dialectical materialism. They attempted communism, got close, but failed to achieve what defines it.
They failed due to under industrialism and external influences, but failed none the less.
Communism is the culmination of a process. Not just something a society does one day.
After Lenin’s death they stopped trying. It failed because Lenin replace one bourgeoisie ruling class with another and expected that class to have the same interests as the working class for some reason. A vanguard party will never work due to different class interests.
A terrorist, you say?
I looked for more information on the photo before posting and unfortunately I couldn’t find specifics on the identity of the man pictured.
If he was an anti-communist fighter in Romania, he would have been fighting in its 1989 revolution which overthrew the Warsaw Pact aligned Romanian Communist Party. The result of the overthrow being a republic styled government.
If I find anything specific I will update the post though.
Terrorists don’t fight against communism. Freedom fighters do.
The problem with that statement is, religiouse zealots use the same rethoric
Removed by mod
I have been looking, unfortunately while the picture is widely circulated the person in the photo is not named anywhere I can find. I will update the post if I come across anything.
Removed by mod
With some random people just sort of milling about in the background.
“Oh, they doin’ the streetfightin’ thing again are they? Bus doesn’t come for another 20 min, let’s have a look-sees.”
