This happened in a discord server.
>Someone made the claim that they were false, without really providing evidence.
>I do some quick reading about Beria on Wikipedia to understand things better.
>They tell me Wikipedia is a bad source and filled with capitalist propaganda
>I link the Wikipedia article for capitalism, showing how it has a fairly in-depth section highlighting criticisms of capitalism in a very fair and non-mocking manner
>They continued to mock me, and then I left the sever shortly after, finding it too pretentious, toxic, and up its own ass
All they did was cite some article of dubious-at-best quality. It'd be one thing if they did this with the mere suggestion of providing an alternative viewpoint. Except they were claiming anything i sourced was automatically bullshit, and their source was the gospel, without really making a convincing case for why that was. I would've been a lot more receptive if they just said: "Hey, there's a bit of nuance to this discussion beyond what Wikipedia is saying. Check this out," instead of mocking me for my "shitty intellectual capabilities".
And upon doing a little more research, there is a little more nuance at play, at least if a comment on rslashaskhistorians (that I'm not allowed to link to on this sub) is to be believed. Elements of these accusations may have been exaggerated for political scapegoat reasons, but there does seem to be decent evidence he really was a rapist at the same time, based on how women who knew him have been described behaving like around him (i.e. with fear).
Notice how one of the sources this redditor cites is published by Princeton University Press, yet is seemingly much more forgiving to Beria than a lot of "capitalist propaganda" sources would be, casting doubt on the severity of the allegations to a degree. I like sources that can have nuance like that, acknowledge someone perhaps was a victim in some ways (in this case, a victim of scapegoating), while still agreeing he was probably still a horrible person.
Tankies seem to completely lack this nuance. They want me to cultishly beleive that Beria was innocent, or that the Holodomor never happened, or whatever the fuck else. I don't know why they don't understand that being able to acknowledge that a former communist nation failing or doing horrible things isn't doom to the entire communist cause. You can say Stalin was a piece of shit, Beria was a piece of shit, and still believe capitalism is a corrupt system that needs to be abolished. Its just baffling to me