• SomeLemmyUser@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Agree with you in general, but I think a lot if people here are not really informed what differences there are materialistic ideologies.

    Yes, Stalin bad.

    But Guevara is not Stalin.

    Marx is not che

    Engels is not Marx

    China is not communist.

    Marxism is not materialism

    Socialism is not communism

    Also the amount of people bringing the “the 3 times people tried socialism were bad, so the whole ideology must be bad” argument are way to high IMHO.

    How many times was capitalism tried? How many times it worked out? Is the USA a “functioning” state with all the oppression, racism, greed, invading other countries out of monetarian interest and environment destruction?

    While I agree with you, that oppression is bad, no matter what the oppressor calls himself, we should talk about policies without resorting to dogmas and generalising people in favor of fear the hegemonic class is propagating to stay in power.

      • TrashcanMarxist@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Should probably listen to Blowback Season 3.

        Not to say they’re a perfect country but to pretend that anyone in the West can critique them when their material conditions are dictated by the actions of the West is just comical.

        If you aren’t a materialist, what are you even doing? As if history happens in the realm of pure thought…

    • 𝔊𝔦𝔫𝔧𝔲𝔱𝔰𝔲@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Is the USA a “functioning” state with all the oppression, racism, greed, invading other countries out of monetarian interest and environment destruction?

      I hope you realize that this is an incredibly privileged take. The US is rife with issues, but the hardships experienced by the average western citizen doesn’t even compare to the suffering that you would find in, say, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, or (to a less extreme extent) Maduro’s Venezuela. To compare what a US citizen deals with on a daily basis due to capitalism to what a citizen of any of those countries had to go through is very reductive and may be perceived as disrespectful to many who had to live those experiences.

      • Definitely_me@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        The United States, for all it’s faults, is the pretty side of capitalism.you don’t even need to look to the most poor countries to see a standard of living that makes even directly post ww2 soviet union look like a great place.

  • BlinkerFluid@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Thank fuck. I thought Lemmy was some ultra militant leftist hellhole before the shift.

    I don’t like extreme radical left any more than extreme radical right.

    Fuck Che Guevara. Read a book.

      • JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Isn’t “authoritarian communist” kind of an oxymoron? 😂 like the whole point of communism is that there isn’t a ruling class. I guess Russia and China were never really communist, just statist authoritarian right? I mean, the Nazis called themselves Socialist. They were nowhere near that

          • JustEnoughDucks@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            The same can be said for capitalism though.

            Capitalism must be enforced somehow, it ends up being an oligarchy or authoritarian because of that.

            • learning2Draw@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Not sure I disagree, necessarily, but that’s the answer to your question.

              it’s also not an either or situation

        • ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Isn’t “authoritarian communist” kind of an oxymoron?

          Most real life implementations of communism used an authoritarian one party system. You can say these aren’t true examples of communism, but that just ends up sounding like cope unfortunately.

        • peanuts4life@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Both. Fascist apologist like to cherry pick palatable characteristics of figures like Stalin, or Hitler, or Andrew Jackson in order to destigmatize thier idolatry of these figures. These “certain aspects” are the tip of the wedge they use to destroy rationality and peace.

          A reasonable person who would like to discuss the benefits of communism would point to the value of labor, advantages of unions, and the dignity of the worker, not the evil, paranoid, and violent person of Stalin.

          Always, the stink of fascism follows the idolization of so called “great men.” Excuses after excuses.

            • peanuts4life@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I am of the strong opinion that fascism doesn’t care if you call yourself a communist, a capitalist, or a Democrat. If someone promotes a state which strips the power of local and individual labor for it’s own use; cultivates violence as a means of domestic control; supports expansionism; and finally the consolidation of power under a personality; I oppose it, and call it what it is.

    • ProcurementCat@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      When the Soviets invaded Czechoslovakia in 1968, there were some british leftists who cheered for those tanks driving into Prague. They proved by this that they didn’t care about leftism, socialism, democracy or anti-imperialism at all - they approved the imperialism and militarism of the Soviet regime.

      Their praise for the rolling tanks is what gave them their name: Tankies.

      So, people who love North Korea, or defend russia invading Ukraine, people, who stand by even the most autoritarian, anti-democratic, militaristic, imperialistic regimes - just because they call themselves “socialist” or “communist” - are “Tankies”.

    • GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Meanwhile anarchist organizing doesn’t have cops, it has Agents of Community Defense who definitely aren’t cops!

      I have nothing against anarchists, but you need to see past slogans to be anything but a useful idiot to neoliberals.

      • Big_Farto@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean any person or entity that enforces oppressive laws is a bastard. The government of China is far from some sort of benevolent state.

  • animelivesmatter@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    finds social media developed by tankies

    looks inside

    finds tankies

    fr I’m down with having a good old purge eventually but noone should be surprised

  • Tante Regenbogen@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why are Blanquists even in the Fediverse? The Fediverse is about decentralization while Blanquists are for the extreme opposite.

    • Silverstrings@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Tankies on their way to explain why teaming up with the Nazis to conquer Poland is actually based and totally in line with Marxist philosophy.

  • Kagami@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    When a leftist, or progressive says “tankie” it is different from what the mainstream media perceives. It (tankie) indicates someone who is overzealously supportive of non-Western imperialist countries such as Russia and China and denies their atrocities.

    Also, the term developed from the tanks deplored by the user to invade Hungary and denote people who supported such action.