On the issue of whether two sides in a dispute are "morally equivalent,"
or even in the same region of morality.
False equivalence is a kind of fallacy that can be used to argue for
various conclusions. Often that fallacy is used to defend unjust
power; the article presents examples. The article also presents
examples of false or misleading accusations of use the fallacy.
Was it better to be in Eastern Europe under the Soviet Empire than in
Central America under US dominion? I think that depends on where and
when. Stalin's rule also included massive arbitrary imprisonment and
execution, sometimes almost at random, but he died in 1953 and after
him the repression was less wild and brutal (but it was still
repression).
I have a feeling that the term "genocide" is being stretched when
applied to the repression in Guatemala. It was a crime against
humanity, for sure; but genocide is something different. In order to
be genocide, the killings would have to have been intended as a step
towards eliminating the Maya of Guatemala. Was that the army's
intent? I don't know for ceertain, but the basis presented here seems
insufficient to show that.