L. was an "not so sane" idealist that end up making a mess that resulted in lots and lots of people getting killed. In the end he even tried and partially succeeded to get some things right.
S. was a power-hungry genocidal psychopathic maniac that actually killed more people than Hitler (oh, and as a sideline, the non-aggression pact he signed with H. also gave the natzys confidence to go ahead and invade all the fucking Europe, and after this ofc that they thought themselves so superior that they could think of "final solutions"... you can put at ~25% of WW2's destruction, plus 50% of the Korean War, plus the consequences of the rushed soviet nuclear program on Stalin's bill too! ). He may have had the "socialist ideals" as an excuse, but that was simply an excuse. He fucked up everything he and his politics touched even post WW2 by "indirect influence": Eastern Europe, North Korea, China... even socialism itself and it's international leaders!
I'm not a leftie, but there's no comparison between the two...
> that resulted in lots and lots of people getting killed
Nitpick: "resulted" implies a passive role that is letting him off a bit too easy. Lenin wasn't out to commit genocide, but he still gave orders to hang people by the hundreds, blinded by an idealistic belief that it was for the greater good.
Did you read the article? Nothing in it paints Rockefeller as evil. Between that and the Lenin != Stalin thing, I think you're confused about who's confused.
You're right, he shouldn't, so it's a good thing no one here or in the article tried to glorify Lenin.
In the future, it might be good for you not to attack people based on what you think they might have said, when you haven't yet bothered to read what they actually did say.
Oh, wow. I thought you were bitching about the article itself, but your "typical lefties" thing was complaining about the politics of an artist more than 80 years ago. Okay...
And in any case, you still haven't read the article. Rivera may or may not have liked Lenin, but putting him in the painting wasn't a political endorsement, it was a troll. He put Lenin on one side, and John D. Rockefeller boozing it up with a hooker on the other side. He was just painting the most offensive stuff he could think of; he was tired of the press attacking him for being too leftist and the socialists attacking him for not being leftist enough, so he said "fuck it" and decided to see how much fun he could have before he got fired.
