This is Hexbear nerd, we don't have downvotes. Quit projecting.

I'm not sure how to respond to this part. Hexbear is a Lemmy instance, there most certainly are downvotes whether you see them or not. Or whether you want to call them "downvotes" or something else... not sure what projection you seem to be trying to point out. Regardless, I'm sure we would agree to put a pin in that one as a semantic argument.

To respond to your comment; Emphasis is the atomic unit of propaganda.

Sure, I won't make an emphatic argument for or against this statement. It doesn't really carry a lot of weight in a vacuum though.

Referring to it as “The Holodomor” and pretending it’s some special things that happened to Ukrainians is an ahistorical, aka revisionist, narrative that attempts to overemphasize the tragedy to a particular people as part of a contemporary political agenda.

This is a strawman... no one here has made any claims or "pretended" that it is some special thing. I won't disagree with you because this statement is true, this definition of the holodomor you give is revisionist, but in a metalogical sense this statement has no bearing on the current discourse here because you're arguing against hypothetical claims no one has actually made. I understand you want to point to people who might make such claims, as this take isn't an unpopular or unfounded opinion in academia. Don't put those words in my mouth, however.

Nobody around here denies there was a famine, but that same famine affected every nationality in the USSR, not just Ukrainians.

I will say, I've definitely seen people deny the famine happening at all in my time online. However, I won't harp on that point or claim the community here propagates that opinion, else I'd be stepping in the same strawman fallacy from before. The famine wasn't limited to just Ukrainians or Ukraine, yes, but I'm not going to stick on that because, again, I never argued otherwise.

Famines were also not atypical of the time period, and while of course they’re great tragedies that should be prevented and those who could have should be criticized for failing to do so,

Famines aren't typical or atypical. At every moment in human history there has been an active famine somewhere. I don't see the point of trying to say "famines were also not atypical of the time period" other than as disingenuous rhetoric that, contrary to what you seem to be arguing here, underplays the significance of the events and the culpability of those responsible.

...it doesn’t make any sense to give this one a super special Holocaust like name associated with a single ethnicity and assign universal blame and condemnation at the feet of one man.

Blaming the entire famine on Stalin or claiming it solely affected Ukrainians would be, again, asinine. Which is, again, explicitly why I did not argue that point. Did you even read what I said or did you just see Holodomor discourse and decide my opinions for me? Further, who's to say the treatment of the Holodomor shouldn't be the norm? Why should the "Great Depression" or the "Bengal Famine" not get the same treatment and use more apt and historical local names for the tragedy? It isn't revisionism to use the term. And, frankly, even if it was, why do you and others take such issue with it? Ukrainians themselves call it the Holodomor. There is evidence of Ukrainians using this terminology even before glasnost. Maybe the problematic terminology isn't "Holodomor" and is more generic names like "Bengal Famine"... people give more of a shit when nouns have gravitas in the West, like it or not. It isn't fair but it is a definite aspect of Western culture and media.

That’s the propaganda getting its hooks into you.

Uh-huh... again, the only person I have seen parroting any rhetoric that might be eschewed as originating in propaganda so far is you, by claiming my own opinions for me with no cognizance for what I actually said. I never made any of the claims that you identify as originating as propaganda; you brought those to the table and claimed someone had said them when that hadn't happened. That is dishonest.

If you gave liberal darlings of history the same treatment you’d be forced to condemn Churchill forever in every conversation because of the Bengali famine that happened during the same time period.

WE FUCKING SHOULD DO THIS!!!!!!!!

For fucks sake dude, YES!! Nobody is arguing otherwise. I agree with this. You are the one trying to bend your words to argue against your ideal strawman. I fucking hate Churchill. Churchill, Stalin, Hitler, and others are all equally fucked people. Jesus fucking christ. There isn't some bar I have where once it is crossed the person gets to go in the "genocidal megalomaniac" bucket... I indiscriminately throw all these bourgeoisie fucks in there because they are all monsters who would murder millions of the "poors" before even considering giving up one of their own.

This dishonest fucking rhetoric surrounding the Holodomor in leftist spaces only serves to make the general public see us in the same light as Holocaust deniers.

Fucking honestly, they might have good reason to do so when people like you do Olympian mental gymnastics like this to try and suck the balls of yet another flawed human government from history that, like every other society ever, has contentious and problematic events. I very intentionally have made no personal arguments about the veracity of the Holodomor as a genocide thus far. My fucking point is that this sort of behavior in our spaces helps nobody other than stroking the egos of people like this, like you.