• Sprinklebump@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      Found the tankie.

      Honestly What bullshit.

      Tankie is a slur for authoritarian communists.

      There is a healthy and honest way to appreciate communism, Russia, the CCP and even DPRK.

      And then there are people who are completely shilling the CCP Russia DPRK as communist uptopias. These people are tankies.

      If you are unable to recoginze the atrocities commited at any point in history, by the USA China, Russia , or any other country for that Matter. You’re a chump.

      • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        85
        arrow-down
        12
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        You all use tankie exactly the same way republicans use woke. As a meaningless thought-terminating cliche deployed against literally everyone to your left to avoid actually learning anything.

        • SeaJ@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Or the way tankies use the phrase ‘libs.’

          • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            31
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Not really? The only thing you ever say to us is “tankie” or accuse us of being bots of some sort. You never actually engage in any discourse. That’s why you have this terminology, it functions as a method of literally dodging any engagement with anything we say, effectively by calling someone a tankie you give yourselves a socially acceptable way to avoid learning anything from socialists. It’s thought-terminating.

            If you have anything worth saying that’s actually in good-faith I will completely engage with you. The point is that you deploy this word to avoid any engagement. The tactic is exactly the same tactic as the conservatives use to avoid any right-wing people engaging with anything to the left of them, if it’s “woke” they can switch off their brain and exercise avoidance to learning anything about it that might make them think differently.

            Liberals, of both the conservative and democrat variety, both use exactly the same tactic on the people to their left.

            Talk to me about something a marxist has just dismissed you on with the use of “lib”. I am happy to talk to you about it. What do you want to say? We call you libs because you ARE libs. You support Liberalism. The ideology of capitalism. Our actual analog to “tankie” is calling you dronies.

      • RustyVenture [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        59
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s a vibes-based invective liberals use the same way chuds use “woke” to dispel any cognitive dissonance that might crop up whenever they discover information they find displeasing because it might mean the rest of the delusions they’re immersed in might not be all that airtight. Just a thought-terminating word with absolutely no meaning. Just like “whataboutism,” it’s a weasel’s way out of addressing someone else’s argument in good faith (which I have yet to see you display in this thread).

        Personally, it’s absolutely fucking hilarious to see how much these words get thrown around, especially when it comes from so-called “leftists.” If you truly are one, you ought to quit it with that bullshit.

        • PreachHard@mander.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I know it gets used like shit but do you think there’s any utility in the term ‘whataboutism’ if the definition is strict? Like I always understood it to be pointing out ludicrous pontificating about things that’ll never happen. Obviously that’s not how it’s used at all in reality and your description is much more apt.

            • PreachHard@mander.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I believe that was the original intent of the word, just wondering if it’s essentially defunct because of how it’s used now.

              • TheLepidopterists [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                12
                ·
                1 year ago

                The term (or the term whataboutery, which it emerged from) was originally used by pro-British newspapers during the troubles to complain that when people would whine about IRA activities others would respond by pointing out that their direct opposition, the British, were committing atrocities.

                It’s always been a tool for Western hegemony to avoid criticism and accusations of hypocrisy.

                • PreachHard@mander.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Wow that was definitely an enlightening read on the etymology, so the word was fucked from the get go haha…

                  Sean O’Conaill (1976) - 'I would not suggest such a thing were it not for the Whatabouts. These are the people who answer every condemnation of the Provisional I.R.A. with an argument to prove the greater immorality of the “enemy”, and therefore the justice of the Provisionals’ cause: “What about Bloody Sunday, internment, torture, force feeding, army intimidation?”. ’

              • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                I see, my mistake, though from a descriptivist standpoint a meaning that a word long-since lost and one that it never had are virtually the same thing on a functional level

          • sooper_dooper_roofer [none/use name]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I know it gets used like shit but do you think there’s any utility in the term ‘whataboutism’ if the definition is strict?

            Nope. Because the argument always goes like this:

            1. non-neutral party brings up problem about non-western place
            2. someone says “well this is actually a bigger problem in the west” after which they get le downvoted
            3. the rationale is “well we’re not talking about the west right now so that’s whataboutism”

            The actual problem starts at step 1, and it’s started by westoids and their news media outlets who constantly a) attack free non-white countries (and Russia) b) stay silent about the (usually much worse) stuff the west is currently doing

            For example, how many westoids have ever said anything about the EU overfishing Indian Ocean waters? Instead it’s always China overfishing X, or making Y animal extinct, even though westoids consume 4x more resources per capita and 90% of the rhino and elephant populations were killed by whites since the 1800s. Fuck mayos and fuck anyone who even reasons within their moronic bullshit paradigm

          • RustyVenture [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’d be tough to get everyone to sign on, but I’d be down for your definition. It sounds like it better matches the word itself. Feels like a term I could use as a synonym for brainstorming, or when I talk about transit expansions in my city

            spoiler

            sicko-wistful

        • Sprinklebump@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Acting like china and russia did nothing wrong is ludacris. They have fucking gulags and education camps.

          Denying this does nothing good for leftist movements. It weakness us as a whole because we can’t have real conversation about the future of leftism.

          I don’t have to support every government that calls itself communist to be a leftist.

          I know that liberals use the term incorrectly. That doesnt mean I cant call out blanatant red fascism when I see it.

          • BurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            21
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Gulag just means prison in Russian. I don’t know what they call prisons in China, but its not gulag. The prison system refered to as “the Gulag” in the west only existed for like 20 years or so. Less people were imprisioned in that system than at any time under Czarist russia, and far less than in the US now.

            Just because it has a foreign name doesn’t make it anything other than just a prison. I know you’re an anarchist and for prison abolition, which is cool. But don’t act like there are some kind of extra bad prisons in AES

          • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            19
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Acting like china and russia did nothing wrong is ludacris.

            Which is why we don’t do it, as you were literally just shown when you asked for examples. Why are you continuing to spread knowing lies about us?

            • Sprinklebump@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Stop using we. And us. You are not a representative of every communist. Lol

              Ive argued many times on this topic. And I found many people calling themselves communists and blindly supporting CPC and The russia federation.

              Stop acting like this isnt a thing.

              • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                20
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Stop using we. And us. You are not a representative of every communist. Lol

                I’m not claiming to be. I am, however, a member of the online community that you’re insulting with claims that you know to be false.

                • Sprinklebump@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Ok great. Honestly I’m getting tired & running out of steam arguing with people.

                  Truth is this. When one of the first big lemmy jumps from reddit came I heard that hexbear was cool a leftist space. so hopped on. I was honestly disgusted by the comments i saw. I saw so many people arguing blindly for CPC and DPRK. Saying they were better than the US and calling anybody critiquing the bold claims they were making libs. such as “Cpc is the future socialism.” And "all the bad things people say about the CPC is american propaganda. "

                  Basically same thing that happend here when I defined tankie as authoritarian communist . In fact I saw this kind of thing on reddit too alot.

                  I dont give a fuck what you say or what other commenters post. I’ve seen this phenomena myself. I’ve been called a lib, So many times, simply for posting that I don’t support Russia or the CPC in leftist spaces. I’m sick of it.

                  So what are we arguing about? Is hexbear not as bad as I thought it was? Ok cool. Im wrong.

                  I know there are people in “your” community that are actual tankies. I’ve argued with them myself. Are you trying to say these people don’t exist? Cuz If you are, You’re the one that is full shit.

                  There anything else you want to debate about?

                  • 0xE60 [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    11
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Have you ever heard of supporting ideas and not concepts as a whole?

                    What I’m saying (and I assume others on Hexbear) when I mention CPC, the USSR or DPRK is taking ideas that are meant for empowering the working class, not the whole concept. The problem is that in the current world the CPC have much more empowerment of the working class than say many of the western countries, with the US being one of the worst offenders.

                    So if you call that blindly supporting the CPC, then I guess we can’t have a conversation about Marxist (or any other political thought) at all.

                    Like let’s say for example Mao and his views towards landlords mao-aggro-shining it’s not as much the hatred towards a landlord as a person (sure there is some animosity) but more of a hatred towards the idea of landlords.

                    Honestly if you really are a critical-thinker Hexbear is a place where that critical thought can flourish as you’ll get called out on bullshit as much as you’ll get great sources of information if you ask for them.

          • RustyVenture [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            When did my personal opinions on Russia or China come into any of this lol all I said was that “tankie” has no definitive meaning as used and that leftists using it is dumb and makes them sound like liberals. That the term to you equates to uncritical support of AES and Russia kind of proves the point in both respects.

            How do you build a future for leftism if you’re going to just call people tankies and tell them to fuck off back to hexbear and lemmygrad? They’re about the last place I’d expect fascism to be celebrated based on my experience.

      • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        51
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you are unable to recognize atrocity propaganda by the US and/or Nazi collaborators or evangelical wackos who believe God tasked them with destroying a country, you’re a chump.

        • Sprinklebump@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Its a good thong that that I do recognizes these these events. i just also know that russia has also commited atrocities. Much like most imperialist nations.

      • SoyViking [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        44
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        There is a healthy and honest way to appreciate communism, Russia, the CCP and even DPRK.

        Please tell us more about those healthy and honest “anti-authoritarian” non-tankie communists. Who are they and what political results have they made?

          • JamesConeZone [they/them]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            49
            ·
            1 year ago

            Sankara is a tankie by everyone’s definition here. He came to power via a coup, held military tribunals trying people for corruption, formed armed groups to defend the revolution, and was vehemently against NATO, the IMF, and other western powers.

            What does anti-authoritarian mean to you if Sankara is anti-authoritarian

            • barrbaric [he/him]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              35
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Also arrested trade union leaders and got into it with a teacher’s union. I obviously support Sankara, and like you say he’s really not different from any other communist leaders except that he was assassinated and his work undone.

            • Sprinklebump@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              He came to power via a coup, held military tribunals trying people for corruption, formed armed groups to defend the revolution, and was vehemently against NATO, the IMF, and other western powers.

              You think trying people for corruption make you authoritarian?

              Are you a liberal?

              • TheLepidopterists [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                25
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I think that authoritarian is a basically meaningless term when applied to a states.

                All states are in the business of using lethal violence, or the threat of it at least, to enforce their rule within their borders.

                  • TheLepidopterists [he/him]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    23
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Okay so if being “authoritarian” is bad and means you shouldn’t be supported, and Sankara ran a state, making him authoritarian, by a definition you’re now agreeing with (again, anyone who runs a state) why are you pretending you don’t think he’s an authoritarian and trying to use him as a cudgel against people who actually share an ideology with him?

                • Sprinklebump@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  By all measures, you should hate Sankara as well. Be consistent.

                  i dont think. so sankara did some really cool things.

                  The USSR did some cool things too , AT FIRST: then they started murdering anarchist and consolidating power and becoming a police state. As an anarchist I oppose this.

                  Maybe Sankara would have done the same if he lived. But he didn’t. He was murdered in a US back coup. He was murdered for being an anti imperialist.

                  The USSR is not anti imperialst. Neither is the CPC. These communists experiments became police states. Sankara didnt.

                  Sankara fought for nitrution, literacy anticorruption anti imperialism. He put more women in government snd fought against female genital mutilation. Anarchist support all of these things.

                  What we dont support is police states. Among other things.

          • Babs [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            25
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            He set up Popular Revolutionary Tribunals to prosecute public officials charged with political crimes[12] and corruption, considering such elements of the state counter-revolutionaries.[15] This led to criticism by Amnesty International for human rights violations, including extrajudicial executions and arbitrary detentions of political opponents.[16]

            idk sounds pretty authoritarian to me.

            • Sprinklebump@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              His country had corruption!

              Im sure there is a better way but your acting like having tribunals makes you authoritarian.

              It doesn’t.

              • Frank [he/him, he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                Statists using tribunals to try other statists is the use of state authority and the use of the state’s monopoly on the legitimate use of force. If “Authoritarian” means anything at all then using the power of the state to prosecute people who are doing state stuff in ways you don’t like is authoritarian.

      • ThereRisesARedStar [she/her, they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        42
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Strange, I do not uncritically support any of those democracies (I assume you mean USSR when you say Russia) and I keep being called tankie.

        Tankie is to liberals as woke is to right liberals and fascists.

        Also it is CPC, CCP has racist connotations and also isn’t what they’re called.

        • Sprinklebump@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah some of them. I think im speaking to one right now.

          Pleae tell me your totally not tankie ideas.

          • robinn2 [he/him]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            30
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            Am I a tankie? I like socialism but think communism (total state control) is too far. We need, as AOC said, “an end to unregulated capitalism”, but we can’t go the authoritarian route of China or North Korea. I envision socialism as Norway and Sweden, these nations that have achieved harmony through peace and cooperation with liberal capitalism; we need nations that don’t put down pro-democracy protests or have “socialist” attitudes around immigration/investment which restrict genuine freedom. I have seen several “tankies” (I hope I am using this right) say, verbatim, “North Korea is heaven on earth and a genuine utopia in every way”, which really worries me. I tried to show them Yeonmi Park videos and Human Rights in North Korea articles but they all just laugh at me. Honestly I’ve considered leaving this instance, since even anarchism seems too far to me (how will capitalism be regulated without a state?), plus a lot of anarchists here are tankies as well, and they have no regard for human rights or the genocide China is currently committing. My only shining light of hope is the people like you who check these attitudes with credible sources and expose these lies in detail. Slava ukraini and freedom to all!

            • OKRainbowKid@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              You’re not a tankie. Tankies deny the oppressive nature of Russia, China, North Korea etc., deflecting all critique with whataboutism by pointing at shortcomings or atrocities of Western nations. Some like to call you Nazi or imperialist if you disagree with them, while in many aspects their ideology and that of their paragon countries is much closer to Nazism than that of liberal democracies like the ones you mentioned.

              • robinn2 [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                26
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Some like to call you Nazi or imperialist if you disagree with them, while in many aspects their ideology and that of their paragon countries is much closer to Nazism than that of liberal democracies like the ones you mentioned.

                Unsure how this could be the case. Norway and Sweden both exploit the third world and have horribly racist attitudes towards immigration. And of course both cozy up to the United States, the country which inspired Nazi Germany in the first place [1] [2] [3].

            • Sprinklebump@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              Am I a tankie? I like socialism but think communism (total state control) is too far.

              No you are not a tankie. You are very painfully a liberal.

              Please keep reading and understand there is a difference between authoritarian communism and communism

              Please see Thomas Sankara.

              https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Sankara

              • robinn2 [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                34
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I was trolling. Thomas Sankara was executed in a U.S.-backed coup. Do you think maybe he should have exercised more authority, better strengthened defenses and built up a stronger base for combatting imperialism, that he could have avoided this (I don’t have an exact policy path, and it’s not like Sankara didn’t put down certain reactionary movements when necessary)? I’m sympathetic to Sankara of course, but if your ideal system of resisting authority succumbs to counter-authority, then maybe you don’t have grounds to condemn greater authority exercised to these ends. I don’t know how a “communist” could see authority in a vacuum to the point of accepting “authoritarianism” as anything other than the singling out of the authority of certain systems over others in safeguarding and expanding interests.

                • Sprinklebump@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I was trolling

                  Your not doing very good job. Your just coming off as an idiot too me.

                  Do you think maybe he should have exercised more authority, better strengthened defenses and built up a stronger base for combatting imperialism, that he could have avoided this (I don’t have an exact policy path, and it’s not like Sankara didn’t put down certain reactionary movements when necessary)?

                  Can you be more concise? Your run on sentences make me want to stop talking to you.

                  Im not here to go over the specifics of Sankaras’s Decisons: But From what I do know. He fought corruption, he pushed literacy programs and fought malnutrition. All While resistsing western imperialsm.

                  Im sure he made mistakes and did some problematic things. As an anarchist I can appreicate the good things he did and be open to the concept that he also did bad things as well.

                  Just like the USSR CPC and other communist governments.

                  I’m sympathetic to Sankara of course, but if your ideal system of resisting authority succumbs to counter-authority, then maybe you don’t have grounds to condemn greater authority exercised to these ends.

                  Your going to have to rewrite, this i dont understand what you are saying. Are you referring to me or Sankara?

                  • robinn2 [he/him]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    17
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Your just coming off as an idiot too me.

                    speech-r clueless

                    Other people understood that I was being sarcastic as well.

                    Can you be more concise? Your run on sentences make me want to stop talking to you.

                    And you dishonestly dismissing my direct response proving you were incorrect about Hexbear critiquing Russia/China makes me want to stop talking to you, yet here we are.

                    Im not here to go over the specifics of Sankaras’s Decisons: But From what I do know. He fought corruption, he pushed literacy programs and fought malnutrition. All While resistsing western imperialsm. Im sure he made mistakes and did some problematic things. As an anarchist I can appreicate the good things he did and be open to the concept that he also did bad things as well. Just like the USSR CPC and other communist governments.

                    Why did you single Sankara’s Burkina Faso out when speaking of exceptions to authoritarian communism, yet now defend your position by tying it into the CPC, which you specifically called “authoritarian”?

                    Your going to have to rewrite, this i dont understand what you are saying. Are you referring to me or Sankara?

                    Rephrased: If your one exception to “authoritarian communism” is a government that was overthrown by imperialism, what does this say about the use of authority in revolutionary states?

                  • GarbageShoot [he/him]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    12
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    The last part reads as being in reference to you, since the socialist states you hate took measures to survive whereas ones like Allende’s Chile folded and their progress brutally reversed.

                    If Sankara had been more effective in protecting the revolution, you very likely would hate him too because he would be smeared just like Fidel and the rest as “authoritarian” etc. Imo this wouldn’t be because of whatever specific measures he took, but the mere fact that he would have posed a more substantial ideological threat to the west for living and being able to keep making progress.

              • ShimmeringKoi [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                We’ve read plenty of Sankara, time you to to read a little Jakarta Method

                This was another very difficult question I had to ask my interview subjects, especially the leftists from Southeast Asia and Latin America. When we would get to discussing the old debates between peaceful and armed revolution; between hardline Marxism and democratic socialism, I would ask:

                “Who was right?”

                In Guatemala, was it Árbenz or Che who had the right approach? Or in Indonesia, when Mao warned Aidit that the PKI should arm themselves, and they did not? In Chile, was it the young revolutionaries in the MIR who were right in those college debates, or the more disciplined, moderate Chilean Communist Party?

                Most of the people I spoke with who were politically involved back then believed fervently in a nonviolent approach, in gradual, peaceful, democratic change. They often had no love for the systems set up by people like Mao. But they knew that their side had lost the debate, because so many of their friends were dead. They often admitted, without hesitation or pleasure, that the hardliners had been right. Aidit’s unarmed party didn’t survive. Allende’s democratic socialism was not allowed, regardless of the détente between the Soviets and Washington.

                Looking at it this way, the major losers of the twentieth century were those who believed too sincerely in the existence a liberal international order, those who trusted too much in democracy, or too much in what the United States said it supported, rather than what it really supported—what the rich countries said, rather than what they did. That group was annihilated.

            • Sprinklebump@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              If you support authoritarian communism, you are a tankie.

              Do you know where the term comes from?

              • BurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                27
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                What is “authoritarian” communism? Sounds like some political compass bullshit that doesn’t exist in the real world.

                Yeah it comes from a disagreement amoung British socialists between people who correctly supported the USSR committing military force to safeguard Hungary from a coup, and some libs who were against it

                • Sprinklebump@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  What is “authoritarian” communism?

                  Why dont you google it?

                  Lmao you acting like im making this word up is the most tankie shit i have ever seen.

                  • BurgerPunk [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    23
                    arrow-down
                    2
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    I’m not acting like you made it up. I answered your question about where it came from accurately. But it gets thrown around today as a meaningless thought terminating cliche like “woke” is by american conservatives/fascists. So, if you’re saying it, I’m going to ask you to clarify, because it doesn’t mean anything, except that you don’t like it.

                    Resorting to “google it” is such cope “Authoritarian” communism is not a real thing. Its some made political compass bullshit

              • VHS [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                18
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                We aren’t uncritical of the USSR, China, and the DPRK, we just think they broadly did (and do) much more good than bad.

                Also, “CCP” isn’t a country or even a party (CPC), it’s China or the PRC. I assume when you say “Russia” you mean the Soviet Union that hasn’t existed in thirty years as Russia is a capitalist country now.

                  • VHS [he/him]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    15
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Communist Party of China, CPC. The country that they are in is China (PRC). A billion people do not live in the “CCP”, that’s like saying Japanese people live in the LDP, and your imprecise use of these terms makes you look uninformed. Unless, of course, you just constantly say “CCP” because you don’t want to recognize that they are the legitimate and popular government of China, you know, a country.

                    I speak of russia generally so I can include USSR and the current state of affairs. I realize they are different but they are both authoritarian. They be capitalist but they call themselves communists.

                    This is a meaningless statement. Any government that wields power to accomplish things is “authoritarian”. It’s silly to equate the USSR with the Russian Federation when they are two very different administrations with distinct ideology and policies. Russia for the past 30 years is a capitalist country with an administration originally installed by the US. Putin is a right-wing figure and an anti-communist. I don’t like Putin and the other rightists in charge of Russia, but I hope NATO doesn’t win out in the East because I don’t want the US Empire ruling over the whole world.

                  • panopticon [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    14
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    saying it like you do, the imperialist media/state department way, puts emphasis on the “Chinese” part, which we object to for reasons that should be obvious

                    you people

                    spoiler

                    :cracker:

      • Fuckass [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        36
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        There is a healthy and honest way to appreciate communism, Russia, the CCP and even DPRK.

        Agreed

        And then there are people who are completely shilling the CCP Russia DPRK as communist uptopias. These people are tankies.

        I would agree with you, if you simply called them dumbasses instead of using the equivalent of “woke” that’s virtually meaningless now. I have seen communists, anarchists, liberals, and even Zelensky being branded as “tankies”

        • Sprinklebump@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Im actually an anarchist. I critizes everone. Including the liberalszzzzz communistss, facists, and the corrupt american imperialsts.

          What a surprize this person pull his images from hexbear.

      • panopticon [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        the atrocities commited at any point in history, by the USA China, Russia , or any other country for that Matter

        Just another whataboutism from a liberal centrist tankie!!!

      • SeaJ@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Not even authoritarian communists. Tankies defend state capitalist China all the time. Same with Russia.

        • sooper_dooper_roofer [none/use name]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Oh wow, it’s almost as if the tiny parcel of land that China controls (less than 10% what the capitalists have) is not sufficient in resources to change the world on its own, so they have to partially adapt to the already existing system in order to have a chance against the west, while still keeping in place socialist policies like eliminating homelessness, small individual plots of farmland, limits on buying real estate on credit, etc

          “OMG this POC must hate themselves because they speak english!” <---- This is you

      • Aria@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        What stops China and the DPRK being utopias is resources, not the CPC or WPK. The CPC and WPK are both forces of good. (What stops Russia from being a communist utopia is that the bourgeois democracy is actively working towards creating a capitalist dystopia).