I forgot to set a reminder so I’m a little late getting to this, but here we are again:
Are you a “tankie”?
Respond “yes” or “no”, I’ll collate results later
This process is being undertaken to determine if so-called “tankies” are conspiring to make you (yes, you) have a bad time on the internet!
vague or informal answers will be interpreted by the central authority (me). Only top level comments will be counted. I will not be providing further instructions or clarifications.
🤯
Link to previous results (very serious) hexbear / lemmy,ml
Link to previous “are you a tankie?” thread
I’ll likely check back in a week, my old pc died so itll take a little bit of time to prettify the results and write a report
Ciao, and of course, imperialism must be destroyed.
No.
I’m an anarchist. I organize with Anti-authoritarian Communist though since most anarchist here are batshit 😅
Probably? At least in the sense that I’ve managed to gather from the very confused online arguments about the term. I’m a communist. While I’d love it if we could all peacefully vote our way into a better society, I recognize that it’s probably not going to happen and whatever nastiness we’d have to do to actually make the change is worth moving past the endless awfulness that is capitalism. And for the existing countries, while they’re not magical Christmas lands, I’ve learned they’re not quite as bad as the capitalists have fear- mongered.
And I get Anarchists thinking it’s states all the way down but…………. I don’t know what to tell you. What’s the alternative? Even if I want to get where you’re going, how do we get there? Where is the bus/train? I don’t see any running to get there.
Hey comrade, have you considered making an account on Lemmy.ml, Lemmygrad.ml, or Hexbear.net? Lemmy.world censors communist content, so you might at least prefer something like Lemmy.zip that can see the content communists are posting.
How does that work? I assumed one Lemmy account covered everything. Where do I go for each of these?
Lemmy instances are kinda like islands, but you can visit and see other islands that are on good terms, or “federated.” Federation can be one-way, ie you can see and comment on another instance’s posts but they can’t see yours, or it can be two-way, and you can comment back and forth. You are on Lemmy.world’s view of a Lemmy.ml post. There are comments from Hexbear and Lemmygrad users on this post that I can see, but you can’t, like this one.
Lemmy.world is defederated from Hexbear.net and Lemmygrad.ml, the two biggest communist instances. In order to see their content and interact with their users, you need an account on an instance like those two, or Lemmy.ml, Lemmy.zip, etc. You don’t need one for each instance, just one federated with what you want to see.
Does that make sense?
So I just pick one of them and I’m good? Any suggestion which one to pick? Just the biggest?
EDIT: Also, am I able to just be logged into both so I can see both sides at the same time or do I have to swap back and forth if I want to check out world or the commy instances?
Well, what is it that you want? Do you want one account that can see almost everything? Lemmy.zip or Lemmy.ml would be better than Lemmy.world, and you can chat with Hexbear and Lemmygrad users as well as Lemmy.world users that way. Do you just want to talk with communists? Lemmygrad.ml or Hexbear.net might be a better fit, you won’t be able to interact with Lemmy.world that way. You can see Lemmy.world content and comment on it from Grad, but they can’t see your content. Hexbear defederated from .world so it doesn’t even show up.
Personally, I use all 3 depending on what I want to do.
I recommend checking out this guide by a good Lemmygrad comrade!
Thanks. Do only some of the instances have an old version? I see one for lemmy.zip but it doesn’t show up for ml or lemmygrad.
no
Tankie is when a third worlder socialist shares the most Milquetoast leftist opinion.
Aigh’t, while i don’t believe in the premise of communism in human civilisation, i think socialism, without it getting over the freedom of people, is one of the way to ensure the future of humanity.
I believe a balanced amount of anarchism and socialism can, for a medium sized population, be good and sustainable on the long run.
Tho to be honest, i don’t know enough in politics to say an answer.
Enlightened socialcentrism.
Why do you think this hypothetical solution is a good idea, and why not communism?
Because pure communism breaks as soon as you have more than a few hundreds of people living together, in my opinion.
We are not ants, and we as a specie are doing things more for ourselves than for others.
A hypothetical society wanting to approach to the closest version of communism would need to be terribly authoritarian and selective, and would be very vulnerable to non workers pushing down the economy. To live in communism means to not let freedom to the workers. It is as unsustainable as fordism.
I don’t know what you mean by “pure” communism. Communism is a mode of production based on collectivized production and distribution, it isn’t a religious vow. Humans are indeed not ants, I don’t see why you think people being self-interested gets in the way of collectivized and planned production and distribution. As for scale, communism works far better at larger scales, and I would say necessarily requires it. I think you may be confusing communism with communalism.
I don’t know what you mean by needing to be “authoritarian to non-workers,” especially because that’s the default in capitalism unless you’re a capitalist. You can have social safety nets while still having the labor necessary to keep society functioning and thriving.
Where did you get this idea of communism?
Looked up on an encyclopedia, i admit i have been actually confusing communism with communalism, or communism at its primal sense. I had the idea that communism is the abolishment of private property and the equal repartition of remuneration between people, wether they work hard or not. Kind of like the functionning of ants. Simply got this idea from high school honestly (heh).
Though, if communism is only about collectivised production and distribution, i can see why it would be interesting to successfully implement it.
Honestly, i haven’t got a good enough knowledge of political alignments yet to be able to answer your question correctly, thank you for making me understand that. Do you reccomand any reads/authors who approached this topic?
Funny you ask, I actually made an entire Marxist-Leninist introductory reading list! It’s designed to introduce key concepts and take you from no knowledge of political theory whatsoever into becoming a good cadre in any ML org. You obviously don’t need the whole thing, though, you can just read or listen to section 0a and you’ll be more than good, even just the first half of the section.
Communism, essentially, is economically compelled by the existing trends of capitalism, ie centralization of markets around a few firms and sprawling production and supply chains, as well as capitalism’s contradictions, like overproduction leading to crisis and the struggle between workers and owners (workers want more for their labor, owners want to pay them less). Collectivized production and distribution has a number of ways to account for labor and resource management, it’s far more complex than just getting everything for free.
Let me know if you have any questions!
Tankie is a pretty cool sounding word, so yes.
no
I don’t know enough about what happened in Hungary to even form an opinion on it and it isn’t at all relevant to today. But I do have actual principles and oppose imperialism, so other instances will say so anyway.
I’m a liberal. I know the power that democracy bestows: vote.
Fighting fascism? Vote hard.
Fighting genocide? Vote harder.
Fighting cancer? You guessed it, just vote.
Vote solves everything, vote is beautiful.
I’m a moderate and believe in supporting the lesser of two evils, which means critical support for enemies of US imperialism. I’m also something of a centrist because I believe anarchists and Marxist-Leninists and other left tendencies all have good ideas.
So yeah, I’m a moderate centrist.
In that “tankie” is just a pejorative for a communist, yes. I’m a Marxist-Leninist, and I uphold AES as legitimate.
Workers of the world, unite! ☭
For those who don’t know what a “tankie” is, it’s essentially a pejorative for “communist.” I recommend the Prolewiki article on “Tankies,” as well as Nia Frome’s essay “Tankies.”
For those that want an introduction to Marxism-Leninism, I made an introductory Marxist-Leninist reading list, check it out!
Oh god oh fuck I’m the type of commie that isn’t obsessed with millitary equipment I didn’t study oh god oh fuck
What is AES in this context? I’m pretty sure it’s not encryption or a corporation lol
Actually Existing Socialism, countries like the PRC, Cuba, DPRK, Vietnam, Laos, former USSR, etc.
Tankie is a pejorative for authoritarians that advocate violence to further their political aims. The particular ideology is just window dressing.
19·2 days agoGeorge Washington is a Tankie. Hitler is a Tankie. Makhno is a Tankie. Elon Musk is a Tankie. Etc.
Obviously, the term “tankie” is only applied to the left. My point was that in that respect there is not really any difference between the extremes of the political spectrum. You could even say they converge in some way.
No, horseshoe theory is just liberalism trying to distance itself from fascism, when historically liberalism abd fascism correspond to capitalism doing okay and capitalism in crisis respectively.
Further, liberalism has also been responsible for mass violence, both the progressive kind such as in the French revolution, and the horribly reactionary kind when it comes to slavery, colonialism, genocide of Palestine, etc.
Redefining words and whataboutism. Name a more iconic duo.
You literally just redefined the word ‘tankie’ when called out for your shitty definition of it.
Also George Washington was a leftist extremist to the British monarchy.
What words did I redefine? What “whataboutism” did I do? I explained very clearly why your definition is bad, and applies to everyone. Comparison is not “whataboutism” inherently.
You’ve expanded the definition to include nearly everyone. All states are authoritarian, in that they are all instruments by which one class wields its authority over other classes. Revolution is the most authoritarian action there is, as was liberating the slaves in Haiti, the Statesian south, etc. You’ve erased any analysis of what these political aims are, essentially saying only pacifists have validity, and historically pacifists have been some of the least effective, or even damaging to their movements.
The communists that wish the working class to wield that authority wield it for progressive means, and in the interest of the people. Eventually, when class is abolished, even the state itself will be too.
I suggest you read the articles I linked, you can read both in the span of ~15 minutes and you’ll have a much better understanding of what “tankie” means.
Your theory has just one minor flaw: every violent revolution ever has resulted in one clique of repressive assholes being replaced with another. And every time they’ve betrayed every ideal they ever did it didn’t have in order to cling on to power. How is your revolution going to be different?
Your comment has one major flaw: it’s wrong.
Revolution in France, for example, ovethrew an oppressive monarchy. Napoleon took power, but it was still an improvement, and in the long run was even better. In Haiti, slavery was overthrown, in Algeria colonialism was overthrown. These are just for national liberation movements and general revolution.
Socialist revolution in Russia, China, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, Korea, and more have all dramatically improved key metrics like life expectancy, dramatically democratized society, increased literacy rates, and lowered disparity while dramatically developing society. Socialism achieves far better metrics at similar levels of wealth and development, even in the face of brutal sanctions.
There is no “betrayal of ideals,” there’s the real process of existing in the world and facing real struggles. Socialism isn’t magic or perfect, it’s simply a much better economic system than capitalism. It isn’t immune to problems or struggles, and it doesn’t gift those running the economy with prophetic visions. Liberal anti-communists hold socialism to a higher standard than liberal systems, refusing it outright if it isn’t heaven on Earth, and call it a “betrayal” if it isn’t immediately a perfect wonderland while giving liberalism a pass, or mild critique.
I expect revolution in the US Empire to go a similar way, only that it won’t be at risk of being nuked or sanctioned to death by the US Empire.
I highly suggest doing more research on the topic at hand, I can make recommendations if you want.
So having all of Europe drenched in blood by Napoleon was an improvement? And you conveniently forgot the terror. Similar things could be said about your other examples. The rest is just assertions without evidence so I’ll have to pull Hitchens’ razor.
The rest is just assertions without evidence
Literally all of your claims have been assertions without evidence
THERE were two “Reigns of Terror,” if we would but remember it and consider it; the one wrought murder in hot passion, the other in heartless cold blood; the one lasted mere months, the other had lasted a thousand years; the one inflicted death upon ten thousand persons, the other upon a hundred millions; but our shudders are all for the “horrors” of the minor Terror, the momentary Terror, so to speak; whereas, what is the horror of swift death by the axe, compared with lifelong death from hunger, cold, insult, cruelty, and heart-break? What is swift death by lightning compared with death by slow fire at the stake? A city cemetery could contain the coffins filled by that brief Terror which we have all been so diligently taught to shiver at and mourn over; but all France could hardly contain the coffins filled by that older and real Terror—that unspeakably bitter and awful Terror which none of us has been taught to see in its vastness or pity as it deserves.
-Mark Twain
In the end, moving beyond feudalism to capitalism was progressive, just as moving on beyond capitalism to socialism was and is progressive. This is rarely bloodless, but it pales in comparison to the daily violence of the present system.
Secondly, I did offer evidence upon request, I find when I just dump sources people tune out. If you have specific questions, I can back them up with answers and evidence, otherwise the lack of evidence applies just as much to you.
The rest is just assertions without evidence so I’ll have to pull Hitchens’ razor.
Neocon Iraq war supporting Christopher Hitchens? weems like a weird guy to quote if you’re opposed to the state murdering people but ok
Yes.
That answer is only for my own country America, I do not have strong opinions for other areas and countries.
And I realize the term is broad, and gives connotations I do not intend.
A socialist movement that is backed by force, and not using democratic methods, would save far more lives than it would destroy.
Americans do not understand democracy because they do not understand, at a fundamental level, that ballot counts need to be witnessed and recounts always allowed.
They cannot be taught that. This removes reform by democracy.
But when reform is imposed on by force there are many who would disagree . So the revolution would need to defend itself. That means time and time again, this would happen repeatedly. And the cost would be horrible.
Of course my preferred solution would raise new problems, and a rise of a new elite would have to countered, and history shows that is hard. But I think because tens of millions of Americans will die if this revolution not happen, then it’s worth it
“In many cases, to avoid conflict is to prolong suffering”
-Ture
Yes
(Or at least I hope so lol)
I’m an anarchist though I do get called a tankie quite a lot as a pejorative.
I’m opposed to all states. That said as someone who lives in the west I don’t really care to spend a lot of energy being mad about what my governments state enemies are doing.
‘democracy’ in capitalist states is a cruel facsimile of actual democracy. If you don’t have money for rent you might as well be unpersoned, corporations are people and money is free speech.
The question is, do you want to murder people who disagree with you?
Obviously not. Not sure what you’re trying to get at here though.
I am in a superposition of being a tankie and not being a tankie at the same time.
Tankies consider me a lib because I dislike DPRK.
Libs consider me a tankie because I dislike “the west”.
Oh well
Pretty much in the same boat
Can I join the club?
No. I do absolutely support Khrushchev sending tanks to Hungary (very rare Khrushchev W), but i’m not British.
