The people who support mowing down civilians with tanks in an effort to protect authoritarian regimes, just because they label themselves as communist.
Almost 100% overlap with “Murica bad!”, which while true in a vacuum, ignores that other countries can also be bad. This results in tankies unironically supporting the Kim family or doing some heavy revisionism around Stalin.
But the same people usually praise other regimes that also abuse human rights. It’s not about the humanity, it’s about not being the right brand of authoritarianism (the right brand is anti-west)
I suspect once Trump goes far enough up Putin’s ass and turns on its European allies, tankies will also start celebrating the USA and ignoring everything that the US is doing in… *gestures broadly everywhere*
They tend to hate Western democracy as a whole. If Trump brings about complete Russian domination in Europe and ends elections in the US for good, of course they’d cheer for their comrade.
That’s my theory anyway. I don’t see modern tankies caring about socialism, that’s more of a guise for their authoritarianism fetish. After all, one of their most celebrated countries, Russia, is not at all socialist either.
Mind that I’m talking about tankies specifically. Plenty of leftists out there who are sensible. Asking about the two wars was kind of a litmus test. To me, if you approve of one offensive war, but not the other, you have some heavy geopolitical bias. Tankies are happy when Ukrainians die, but against the war in Palestine. Fascists are happy when Palestinians die, but have differing opinions on Ukraine. If you just don’t like people dying and think neither Israel nor Russia is in the right, then you’re not a tankie. Oversimplified, but very quick way to gauge whether someone is opposing some geopolitical bloc, or injustice and violence.
I am. So many proclaimed “communists” don’t really care about the whole communist thing, they just want a dictator.
The “leftist” spaces on grad, .ml and Hexbear were SUPER pro Russia last time I cared to see what they were up to. Tell me, in what universe is Russia a communist or even socialist nation? And at the same time, socdems are seen as evil incarnate. China, too, allows for billionaires, but since there’s a strong one party rule and they’re not allies of the west, they’re A-OK too.
I already said I’m talking about tankies, not leftists, socialists or even communists. Tankies just use their so-called leftism as a disguise when really they just worship authoritarianism.
So the difference between a modern day tankie and a socialist is that the former would prefer everyone in the geopolitical west to die or suffer, whereas the latter would prefer socialism to spread to the west.
Also just an FYI that the non-revisionist internationalist socialist position is one of not supporting either side in an inter-imperialist war (read: a conventional one between two capitalist governments, not an anti-colonial one e.g.) and if viable go for revolutionary defeatism in ones home country
Spoken like a true lib who shares 99% of their perception of communist states with the CIA.
“Murica bad but also commie countries bad” is western capitalist propaganda to drive progressive people into apathy and inaction.
To quote Michael Parenti:
So, you compare a country from what it came from, with all its imperfections. And to those who demand instant perfection the day after the revolution, they go up and say: “Are there civil liberties for the fascists? Are they gonna be allowed their newspapers and their radio programs, are they gonna be able to keep all their farms?”
The passion that some of our liberals feel, the day after the revolution, the passion and concern that they feel for the fascists, the civil rights and the civil liberties of those fascists who were dumping and destroying and murdering people before. Now the revolution has got to be perfect, it has got to be flawless.
Well, that is not my criteria, my criteria is what happens to those who couldn’t read? What happens to those babies who couldn’t eat, who died of hunger? And that’s why I support revolution. The revolution that feeds the children gets my support.
I love Micheal Parenti but that quote doesn’t address the criticism. Parenti talks of revolution, OP talks of a government preserving the status quote.
Of course it addresses the criticism. The USSR securing a revolutionary sphere of influence against the USA is obviously about the “looking for perfection after the revolution”.
I am referring to the Maoist concept of social imperialism of the USSR, which I tend to agree with.
I am not talking about capitalist financial imperialism, this allegation being well refuted by Castro:
How could the Soviet Union be classified as imperialist? Where are its monopolist enterprises? What is its participation in multinational companies? What industries, what mines, what petroleum deposits does it own in the underdeveloped world? What worker is exploited in any country of Asia, Africa or Latin America by Soviet capital? The economic cooperation which the Soviet Union is offering Cuba and many other countries did not come from the sweat and the sacrifice of exploited workers of other peoples, but from the sweat and effort of Soviet workers
Edit: Castro’s refutation is also a great explanation, of why I would classify today’s PRC as regularly imperialist, even if not to the degree of the USA/EU etc.
Again, I’m not the one looking for perfection. I’m the one supporting “the revolution that feeds the children”. That was the Bolshevik revolution, so I support it.
The people who support mowing down civilians with tanks in an effort to protect authoritarian regimes, just because they label themselves as communist.
Almost 100% overlap with “Murica bad!”, which while true in a vacuum, ignores that other countries can also be bad. This results in tankies unironically supporting the Kim family or doing some heavy revisionism around Stalin.
Any leftist and every sane person says “Amerikkka bad”
It’s the worst thing to happen to humanity in the second half of the 20th century and beyond
But the same people usually praise other regimes that also abuse human rights. It’s not about the humanity, it’s about not being the right brand of authoritarianism (the right brand is anti-west)
I suspect once Trump goes far enough up Putin’s ass and turns on its European allies, tankies will also start celebrating the USA and ignoring everything that the US is doing in… *gestures broadly everywhere*
What.
Where do you stand on the war in Palestine and where do you stand on the war in Ukraine?
What version of ‘tankie’ is the one that would praise the US for literally anything trump does?
Like if there’s one thing I thought I knew about tankies, it was that they fucking loathe the US and Trump
They tend to hate Western democracy as a whole. If Trump brings about complete Russian domination in Europe and ends elections in the US for good, of course they’d cheer for their comrade.
That’s my theory anyway. I don’t see modern tankies caring about socialism, that’s more of a guise for their authoritarianism fetish. After all, one of their most celebrated countries, Russia, is not at all socialist either.
Mind that I’m talking about tankies specifically. Plenty of leftists out there who are sensible. Asking about the two wars was kind of a litmus test. To me, if you approve of one offensive war, but not the other, you have some heavy geopolitical bias. Tankies are happy when Ukrainians die, but against the war in Palestine. Fascists are happy when Palestinians die, but have differing opinions on Ukraine. If you just don’t like people dying and think neither Israel nor Russia is in the right, then you’re not a tankie. Oversimplified, but very quick way to gauge whether someone is opposing some geopolitical bloc, or injustice and violence.
You’re not talking about tankies then.
I am. So many proclaimed “communists” don’t really care about the whole communist thing, they just want a dictator.
The “leftist” spaces on grad, .ml and Hexbear were SUPER pro Russia last time I cared to see what they were up to. Tell me, in what universe is Russia a communist or even socialist nation? And at the same time, socdems are seen as evil incarnate. China, too, allows for billionaires, but since there’s a strong one party rule and they’re not allies of the west, they’re A-OK too.
I already said I’m talking about tankies, not leftists, socialists or even communists. Tankies just use their so-called leftism as a disguise when really they just worship authoritarianism.
So the difference between a modern day tankie and a socialist is that the former would prefer everyone in the geopolitical west to die or suffer, whereas the latter would prefer socialism to spread to the west.
Every proper socialist hates bourgeois “democracies” lmao
But Russia (capitalist) and China (capitalist) are fine, right? Since they don’t have democracy at all.
I thought tankies were marxist-leninist, which is both socialism and authoritarianism.
The socialism is optional now. Which is why they love Russia and China, two capitalist nations.
Also just an FYI that the non-revisionist internationalist socialist position is one of not supporting either side in an inter-imperialist war (read: a conventional one between two capitalist governments, not an anti-colonial one e.g.) and if viable go for revolutionary defeatism in ones home country
Spoken like a true lib who shares 99% of their perception of communist states with the CIA.
“Murica bad but also commie countries bad” is western capitalist propaganda to drive progressive people into apathy and inaction.
To quote Michael Parenti:
I love Micheal Parenti but that quote doesn’t address the criticism. Parenti talks of revolution, OP talks of a government preserving the status quote.
Of course it addresses the criticism. The USSR securing a revolutionary sphere of influence against the USA is obviously about the “looking for perfection after the revolution”.
It’s pretty obviously social imperialism and not relations on equal footing IMO
Not sure I get your comment, care to explain?
I am referring to the Maoist concept of social imperialism of the USSR, which I tend to agree with.
I am not talking about capitalist financial imperialism, this allegation being well refuted by Castro:
Edit: Castro’s refutation is also a great explanation, of why I would classify today’s PRC as regularly imperialist, even if not to the degree of the USA/EU etc.
deleted by creator
Establishing a hegemon can only be done after the revolution. Once you eat that pill there’s no perfection afterwards without some self-destruction.
Again, I’m not the one looking for perfection. I’m the one supporting “the revolution that feeds the children”. That was the Bolshevik revolution, so I support it.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Excellent contribution