The Soviets had their own show trials, basically. They acted mostly through neiborhood denunciations and tedious fabrications of evidences of wrong doing. Their purges involved extensive demoralization of their targets along with tortures and demands of admissions of guilt until they broke.
Thus communism was more a suicide PC cult than a direct murder cult and thus it made it much more vicious and difficult to track.
Today the media masquerade is pretty similar, one involving making innocent an arab-street known to cooperate with terrorists as obvious agents, but then making them look like they are just normal families doing weddings.
This is all a masquerade.
Also the Geneva convention of turning war into some kind of sports with a non-existing referee is absolutely outrageous and part of the problem, because the nations following these rules that go beyond mere punishment of crime against humanity, have been used to blackmail the West.
Then we got the grand masquerade role play of unmasking Hitler before unmasking Stalin, a typical war alliance scenario ploy. WWII could have happened with Europe allied with Hitler against Stalin, but it did not happen that way... Hitler was unmasked as a more immediate enemy and had to be vilified more urgently and determinedly to justify the war effort.
This justification did not want to dig further in the case of Stalin because of pure cowardice. It simply is that the Nuremberg trials were not the genesis of Western determination in WWII, but simply a political tool product that was not meant to be furthered beyond its use in the prosecution of the war against Germany.
Much like today’s reverse racism in America, the Civil Rights are not applied universally against black racism and obvious black in-race inbreeding, despite it following a very tradition of Demorcrat slavery of inbreeding blacks to make them hard worker or ... Basket Ball players.
Hitler chose Socialism but morphed it immediately into some sort of misguided grotesque nationalism survival of superiority by pure racial historicisms and not historical veracity. The Soviets got to play the more feminist card as a result of opposition and masquerading as a victim. THe Soviets however did have their own progressist views of race superiorizing and combined usage of armies of tools (half-ape and half human). Nazies had pure race nonsense for their pride, the Soviets had an anticipationist extra-terrestrial like race of progress.
However the language of progress was clear, it was one of equal or greater corruption than Nazi loot.
Because just as the Nazis viewed Jews as backwards and demanded them to surrender their inheritences, so is the language of progressism, demanding that current generations abandon their treasures to the Soviet Apparatus as trophies.
I was going to note the same thing: Nuremberg had enough fundamental problem to not be repeated in its exact form: it was a trial by the winners of the losers, with the Soviet Union sitting as judge of Germany for no other reason than that; the body of law under which to try war crimes did not exist; the concept of guilt seemed fuzzy. But I think that the author asks us to look beyond the implementation of the Nuremberg trial, and to recognize that no public condemnation of communism was ever done by any international institution, nor in fact by any leading world power in its own jurisdiction.
That indifference to the problem of international justice of this proportion makes the entire edifice of international law nothing much more than a self-serving joke of the Left.