this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2023
15 points (94.1% liked)

Memes

45729 readers
976 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 0x2d@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (7 children)

So many hexbear users here lmao

[–] ThisMachineKillsFascists@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

We can smell liberal lies from a mile away

[–] Comment105@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago

Why the fuck do both authoritarian sides use "liberal" as an insult?

It's because they both think the common man should be submissive or forced to submit to their brand of authoritarianism.

[–] Annakah69@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago

Libs are subconsciously uncomfortable thinking about real politics. Too many contradictions with their world view. Leftists are not. Hence a lot of us engage with these threads, it gets to the top of our all, and more engage.

[–] figaro@lemdro.id 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As they get banned from more instances, the instances they are not banned at start seeing a higher concentration of them.

[–] Annakah69@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago

Not how federation works.

[–] arefx@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)
[–] WideningGyro@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do you agree with this meme and consider yourself part of "the Left"? Just curious

[–] arefx@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

That's irrelevant, also, I'm not interested in discourse with you. Bye.

Then you shouldn't have said anything

The_Donald is when you believe the opposite of The_Donald

[–] Rossel@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 year ago

This has made my Lemmy experience considerably better

[–] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com -1 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Holy shit. Too bad instances can't defederate HB. They seem to not understand that they're tankies.

[–] Annakah69@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago

Have fun worshipping the machinery of enslavement and death. As it crushes you, I hope it comforts you knowing at least you weren't a tankie.

[–] carl_marks_1312@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Too bad instances can't defederate HB.

Can you please elaborate?

They seem to not understand that they're tankies.

Tankie is a social construct and is used to lazily discredit everyone to the left of bernie. It functions to libs the same way as "woke" functions for chuds. As a term it's basically meaningless to anyone outside of the internet.

[–] FluffyPotato@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I have only seen it used in reference to people who support dictatorial regimes with socialist aesthetics, mostly MLs. I have yet to see an anarchist be called a tankie. Also you can hear it IRL, not commonly though since most MLs are on twitter and the like and not IRL.

Literally every one of our anarchist users have been called tankies, lmao

[–] Annakah69@hexbear.net 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Based on your answer, I've discovered what tankie means: Tankie = Marxist.

Successful Marxist movement results in a dictatorship of the proletariat. Dictator = tankie.

Hence tankie is a term used to describe any Marxist.

Thanks for contributing to this scientific breakthrough!

[–] FluffyPotato@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (4 children)

Nah, first premise is false in more than one way. You are conflating the ideology Stalin made with Marxism.

The second error is that there has never been a dictatorship of the proletariat, every time it has been a political party that seizes power for themselves and not the workers. In doing so they become the ruling class with differing class interests than the workers.

Marx must be rotating in his grave with the speed to power the whole globe at this point.

[–] Annakah69@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago

You didn't do the reading :(. Dictatorship of the proletariat is a concept Marx and Engles adopted. Stalin didn't create it.

I don't know what you think the proletariat taking control of the state is suppose to look like, but there will always be a communist party involved. The mechanisms of power exist to be ruled by a party.

Communist parties should be judged by what they do for their poorest citizens. With that in mind, AES countries are doing a decent job. Things get better when they are in power, and get way worse if they are overthrown

[–] WideningGyro@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, clearly the Soviet, Chinese and Cuban workers had completely different interests than being raised out of poverty and squalor. Damn those dastardly political parties and their... diligent work towards eradictaing poverty while promoting actual, decentralized democracy.

[–] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Well, Cubans still live in pretty close proximity to squalor. They can't even afford to maintain their own buildings, don't have a functional transportation system, and people live on what, $20 a month? The one saving grace is out there health care system is decent. And by that, I mean much more equitable than in the United States.

Theyre also a small island nation which has survived 60 years of brutal siege and sabotage by the imperial core 70 miles away.

[–] Ram_The_Manparts@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago

Do you think that US actions against Cuba such as sanctions and blockades is part of the reason Cuba is a poor country?

And if yes, to what extent?

[–] MF_COOM@hexbear.net 0 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

What my society looks like when a party seizes power for themselves and not the workers

(Source: Thomas Piketty's World Inequality Report 2022, for fun maybe try poking around and finding a non socialist state with any comparable inversion of income inequality.)

[–] FluffyPotato@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do you believe capitalism is good because it helped some people? The whole point of socialism is to put the means of production into the hands of the workers and not a vanguard party. Yea, the USSR did quite a lot of imperialism which it used to reduce income inequality of the Russian people but it was never socialist.

[–] MF_COOM@hexbear.net 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Do you know what imperialism means

[–] FluffyPotato@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, the USSR annexing it's neighbours and then exporting their resources and people was very much imperialism.

Read this book to stop seeming so silly.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1916/imp-hsc/

Also the non Russian SSRs voted to keep the soviet union around at higher rates than the Russians.

[–] uralsolo@hexbear.net 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

the ideology Stalin made

I would say Lenin was more instrumental in the creation of Marxism-Leninism, Stalin was just the guy who happened to be in charge when they named it. It's also a tendency that has evolved a lot from what it was in the 40s.

[–] FluffyPotato@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You mean the guy in charge after the death of Lenin? Who Lenin warned against?

[–] uralsolo@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago

I mean the guy who had the support of 99% of the communists, yes.

[–] BigNote@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I love how you guys have decided that your definitions are the only correct ones. It's your primary weapon here, for obvious reasons.

Communism is political science, words have meanings and we tend to use the correct ones, yes.

[–] carl_marks_1312@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago

I love how you guys have decided that your definitions are the only correct ones.

You're strawmaning hard here, because I never said it's a definition or that it's the only one. It's just my understanding of the term. What part of it is wrong in your opinion? I want to consider it

It's your primary weapon here, for obvious reasons.

Because it's obvious that when you're challenged on your understanding of words you have nothing to say?

[–] Nakoichi@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] pythonoob@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

No one seems to know

[–] oatscoop@midwest.social -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

The term originates from Soviet and aligned regimes sending in tanks to brutally crush protests and rebellions. E.g. The Hungarian Revolution, The Prague Spring Uprising, Tiananmen Square, etc. Some communists were disgusted at their fellows for cheering on said oppression ("Send in the tanks!") and started calling them Tankies.

Tankies fellate oppressive regimes and dictators. They're the smooth-brained "communists" that live in a binary world where anything "their side" does is good and anything the west does is "evil". They'll claim any criticism of historically "communist" countries like China and Russia is a CIA talking point ... because they're idiots.

TL;DR -- they're the MAGAts of the left.

[–] ThereRisesARedStar@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Tbf the hungarian coup was actually connected to an mi6 operation. And the people involved started killing Jewish people and communists, so... t34

[–] ThisMachineKillsFascists@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Oh, so calling people Tankie is just red scare propaganda then. Thanks for the heads up.

[–] Zuzak@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Random observation but I find it kind of interesting how the talking points anti-tankies tend to bring up are things that, even if the worst allegations are accepted, are relatively minor compared to some other events you could bring up. I've heard so much about Tienanmen Square under Deng, but much less about the Cultural Revolution under Mao. And the Hungarian Revolution and the Prague Spring happened under Khrushchev and Brezhnev respectively, when there's much worse stuff you could bring up about Stalin.

I can't help but think that this conflicts with the supposed definition of tankie of just knee-jerk defending anything someone does if they wave a red flag. If that were actually true, wouldn't you focus on the most extreme examples by the most extreme leaders? The fact that there's so much focus on people like Khrushchev and Deng, who were both more moderate than their predecessors, seems more like the point of the word is specifically to attack people who might have a more favorable view of those more moderate figures, while being critical of their predecessors' actions.

Which is to say, tankie isn't actually meant to be directed towards someone who knee-jerk defends anyone with a red flag, but rather, it's meant to be directed towards someone who defends anything at all about anyone at all with a red flag, by accusing them of being the former. In other words, it's a word that demands the exact kind of knee-jerk response it's supposedly criticizing, just in the other direction.

In fact, it's particularly interesting that these accusations of ideological rigidity and blind loyalty are in reference to Khrushchev, who did nothing but criticize Stalin, and Deng who controversially said that Mao was "70% good, 30% bad." I don't think it's even possible for someone to defend everything done by both Stalin and Khrushchev

[–] PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And anyone who dares criticize them or any actual communist is a fascist, of course!

[–] BeamBrain@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago

"An actual communist is someone who hates any communist movement that has actually managed to successfully overthrow its country's ruling class and take power," I say without a hint of irony

[–] rubpoll@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago

I support crushing fascists with tanks.

[–] ProxyTheAwesome@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nooo not tankies! Don’t they know it’s illegal to be a communist

[–] ThisMachineKillsFascists@hexbear.net 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

they wish it was and will side with Nazis to make it a reality

[–] mustardman@discuss.tchncs.de -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Classic Hexbear take that is not remotely based in reality.

They historically have aligned with or created fascist movements to oppose communists around the globe. Read the Jakarta method, read about the contras.