Funny aside, ziq hates me :D
You must log in or register to comment.
Why are you seriously posting something from ziq, a person that hates you?
Anyways, why are you taking anything he says seriously?
I just read the first few paragraphs, which include an ahistorical description of the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, ignores the CIA's operations in Afghanistan before 1979 (which they have admitted to themselves) and cites an American professor living in South Korea whose entire job is to write propaganda about North Korea, propaganda which his own peers in the USA and South Korea have criticized and called absurd.
There is little of value here, this is the ramblings of someone that throwing stuff out there hoping it sticks. This is not anarchist theory. The first few paragraphs are less factual than the average descriptions of history that you'd see on liberal/capitalist media or get in a high school history class.
Also Tainanmen. Athough fatal clashes did occur on Chang’An avenue and elsewhere in the city, in which hundreds of civilians and a smaller number of soldiers died, witness testimony from numerous western journalists and diplomats and student organizers themselves who were in the square all night, has indicated that no one died in Tiananmen itself. A Spanish news crew even filmed crowds of students walking out of the square at the end of the night. The Tiananmen Square Massacre is a stunning example of a “big lie repeated often enough.”
The first link is a comprehensive article. I can link more on request.
spoilered to avoid spamming
Some important context for why things turned so ugly after two months of peace, and why a false narrative took hold in such a coordinated way afterward, is that the CIA and its cutouts were openly present. For starters, 30 year CIA veteran James Lilley was appointed ambassador to China on April 20th, five days after the start of public gatherings in Tiananmen, which were initially to mourn the April 15 death of Hu Yaobang. Gene Sharp, who literally wrote the manual for how to start nonviolent color revolutions, flew in for 9 days and observed mysterious efforts to drive the protesters to violence — an intelligence asset only partially aware of the project he was involved in. The CIA was embedded with the protesters "for months" according to the Vancouver Sun, steering and equipping them. Voice of America was broadcasting disinformation to PLA military bases claiming some units were loyal to the protesters and were firing on other units, and claiming Deng Xiaoping was near death — literally attempting to whip up a military insurrection. This was a committed US effort to topple the Chinese government, using the momentum of the USSR dissolving and Hu Yaobang’s death.
This is "theory" that I only ever see vaushites sharing going "hmmm interesting"
Do you want to actually change the existing order? What we have now is violent and authoritarian, replacing it will also be violent and authoritarian.
Even people that watch vaush and get their leftist theory from Youtube probably think parts of the first few paragraphs of this article are bogus. You'd literally get a more factual description of history from your average high school history class.
Then you'll end up with a violent and authoritarian society, so nothing has ultimately changed.
All revolutions are, are you going to manifest a wish into reality?
Your enemies are also violent authoritarians, how do you propose that a nonviolent nonauthoritarian revolution protect what gains it has and resist organized violence without some level of "authoritarianism" literally every example of revolutions (anarchists and otherwise) have this feature, or they fail.
I don't consider needing to make a unified front nearly as authoritarian as the everyday violence under capitalism.
A unified front does not have to be authoritarian, by which we mean hierarchical top-down power structures.
Here's a good starting point to learn more: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/the-anarchist-faq-editorial-collective-an-anarchist-faq-full#text-amuse-label-sech21
You seem to have a lot of faith in manifesting your imagination into reality. I suggest joining an organization and putting in some work, because that's how literally anything in reality get changed.
I organize with anarchists and most of them would get called tankies by you online anarchists lmao
I organize with anarchists and most of them would get called tankies by you online anarchists lmao
This is what I say all the time around here. I really don't get all this hatred agains commies.
I will say I do get annoyed at mls ranting about anarchists in a vacuum for the exact reason, and that's honestly why I gravitated to hexbear. There's plenty we agree on, and a lot that everyone should learn from history. Trying to make some sort of us vs them thing is wrecker behavior.
I agree. I myself am much more inclined to anarchism than communism. I don't see anything productive coming out of these provocations.
Also calling everyone a tankie is pretty offensive.
It's extra grating because a lot of the people calling you a tankie these days are cheering for the Merkavas in Gaza right now
It’s extra grating because a lot of the people calling you a tankie these days are cheering for the Merkavas in Gaza right now
right? but that isn't news. fascists always hated us.
You seem to have a lot of faith in manifesting your imagination into reality. I suggest joining an organization and putting in some work, because that’s how literally anything in reality get changed.
I suggest you look at my body of work before suggesting to me to do more work.
I organize with anarchists and most of them would get called tankies by you online anarchists lmao
Y'all have a very western/USA-centric pespective of anarchists and it shows.
Are you in any organizations?
Y'all have a very western/USA-centric pespective of anarchists and it shows.
Can you elaborate? Most anarchists (not all) I've run into have been in the US, but I was saying they would get called tankies by your standards. Most of the older ones in particular.
Man why do you all have to do the interrogation shtick? It's really jarring to have online randos looking into one's private life yanno?
Can you elaborate? Most anarchists (not all) I've run into have been in the US
I am Greek. Anarchists have a way less favorable impression of MLs, partly because our ml orgs were never destroyed like the American ones, so we get to see ml praxis daily.
I'm Greek too, as are a number of the anarchists I know- the KKE isn't in power and none of the anarchists I talked to ever took time out of their day to shittalk it either.
Εγώ έχω διαφορετικές εμπειρίες. Δεν είναι οτι το οι αναρχικοί μιλάνε για το ΚΚΕ όλη την ώρα, αλλά σίγουρα δεν συνεργάζονται μαζί τους και μπορεις πολύ συχνα να δεις πως τους αντιμετωπίζουν.
I prefer to keep it so other people can read, I don't care to flex. And yeah, I would agree, they don't cooperate, but its certainly not directly antagonistic either.
The worst I heard was anarchists at most regard them as ineffective nerds, in particular for fucking around with parliament instead of more direct action and supporting encampments/squats. For me that's a long way from the 'red fash' depictions you get about 'authority'. One of the more cutting complaints I heard was that a group would spend more time on if its banners read as 'ML' or 'ΜΛ' to be properly decolonial instead of just going out in the street.
, but its certainly not directly antagonistic either.
I don't know who you're talking to, or in what context, but I can assure you there's plenty of antagonism: Here's a classic: https://athens.indymedia.org/post/1349901/
That's what I meant with fucking around with parliament- I don't disagree that they're too committed to the existing state. I have a lot of issues with the organization but it's a product of more than just being ML - there's a lot of historical reasons at play too and I can appreciate why they reluctant to challenge the state directly.
This is the same reason organizations I work in don't cooperate with electorally-oriented groups either.
Dogmatism is a problem in every tendency. Same reason I push back on anarchists (or MLs) trying to start fights over political disagreements from like a hundred years ago. The problem is the capitalists with the boot on all our necks.
Mate, it's not just the party. Half my family are tankies. I have immense and exhaustive experience with ML hypocrisy and their true thoughts about Anarchists. I also have a lot of lived experiences on this. A lot of my best friends as a young adult were in the KNE. I've written for KNE papers. It's part of the reason why it's worthless to ask me to debate my positions. It's when people can't understand that and want to act all sealiony and/or condescending that I turn to ridiculing them.
Y'all can believe what you want about "left-unity". I have had both enough experience and theory to hold my positions on it.
. The problem is the capitalists with the boot on all our necks.
We all know anarchists and MLs agree in theory, but when it comes to praxis, cooperation only works when it's anarchist praxis.
Not trying to sealion - l'm not even trying to debate you at this point.
Most of my family that were 'tankies' have passed and most of the younger ones are completely disengaged politically.
spoiler
Also as a trans person they were way cooler about it than the more 'traditional' ones, one of whom was misgendering me on her deathbed.
I will also say that my lived experience doing years of encampment support in the US, I run into way more MLs (formally or informally) who I have been able to consistently work with towards shared goals. That's why I feel obligated to point out that most of the distinction made online (in particular about hypothetical revolutions) fade away in the real world.
Not trying to sealion - l’m not even trying to debate you at this point.
I didn't accuse you of it. I was speaking rhetorically to explain why I'm been ridiculing hexbears the past few days.
Most of my family that were ‘tankies’ have passed and most of the younger ones are completely disengaged politically.
I don't know if you are talking about family in Greece itself or not but it seems your lived experiences are US-centric. Almost my tankie relatives are very much alive, and the younger gen is pretty into the same theory as well. There's obviously changes in some social standards, but the core is remains surprisingly similar to what I'm used to.
I will also say that my lived experience doing years of encampment support in the US, I run into way more MLs (formally or informally) who I have been able to consistently work with towards shared goals
Well thing is, anarchists in 1917 were probably of the same opinion until things like the Konstadt started happening. We can literally read contemporary anarchists get completely disillusioned with their revolution once the MLs took power. And that's before the bad times even.
I don't know if you are talking about family in Greece itself or not but it seems your lived experiences are US-centric.
Specifically Greek, I have almost no family in the US.
anarchists in 1917 were probably of the same opinion until things like the Konstadt started happening.
I'm a pretty paranoid person, but one of the things I have resigned myself to is that you can't really change the world without exposing yourself to deception (and doing some deception yourself). Historical events are the product of their historical context, I prefer to work with comrades I can find here and now, and let them be the ones to disappoint me.
This is the sad part y'all not getting about the arguments from the anarchists like me. It's not that the MLs are "nyah nyah" deceptive currently. They probably truly believe what they say. But the ML praxis will invariably lead to the same outcomes of hierarchical oppression to any dissent and especially anarchist dissent, "for the good of the revolution". Bakunin predicted this years before Lenin! I'm not going to wait to be surprised pikachu about it.
I'm not going to wait to be surprised pikachu about it.
Thing is you cited the example of a existing ML org not being radical enough and refusing to really challenge power in there here and now as evidence that in the future (if successful) they're gonna be exterminating dissent. That's why you're not really reaching me.
I'm trying to say that the issues I have heard with the KKE is that it wasn't willing to go far enough, and often will still prevent anarchists from being "too disruptive" at their events. I understand why they do, in particular because they may not feel ready for the police response. I see the same thing at protests in the US, it doesn't mean I agree with it, but it's also a far way from being in a position to do a Kronstadt again.
There's a historical background to a lot of this, and a lot of historical violence tend to also be in the broader historical context of things like civil war, which is how a movement will end up in the situation of: "do we forcibly conscript people or do we let the fascists overrun us?"
My perspective is: Give people their freedom and they will fight tooth and nail to prevent themselves losing it again. We've seen this play out many times in history. However put just yet another red boss on top and you will need that conscription and all the authoritarianism that will come after and will crush any advance towards socialism.
I don't think KKE will ever get into power either. But that irrelevant. My point is that authoritarian praxis will lead to authoritarian outcomes, which will also inadvertently include things like purges of dissidents at the start and lead to a collapse back into capitalism eventually. This is why I don't trust any ML "left unity".
Give people their freedom and they will fight tooth and nail to prevent themselves losing it again
"freedom" is the most meaningless word in politics. People use it to mean both "freedom from" oppression and "freedom to" oppress. Socialists, Communists, and anarchists want freedom from oppression but don't always agree on how to get there. The bourgeoisie want the freedom to oppress the proletariat.
However put just yet another red boss on top
this is such a tired trope. you're worried about the supposed "red boss" while
is still in power. "We can't do revolution because meet the new boss same as the old boss!" Give it a rest.you will need that conscription and all the authoritarianism that will come after and will crush any advance towards socialism.
Authoritarianism is the second most meaningless word in politics. The ruling class always cries about authoritarianism as they are being overthrown by the very same people who they have been exercising authority over. A social class will dictate the conditions of production. Is it going to be the proletariat, or the bourgeoisie? Is it going to be the impoverished majority, or the opulent minority?
They had a good back and forth that got to some of the details of the disagreement and aired em out a bit and you show up afterwards to try and just "YOU'RE WRONG!", Ignoring most of what was said.
Regardless of who is "correct" between ML and anarchists here, why are so many hexbear users just so unpleasant in their attempts to engage on this?
They've dehumanized me as a "wrecker" so it gives them the moral justification to engage in bad faith and "bully" me.
They've dehumanized me as a "wrecker"
Eve fartlow-level self victimization
Dude you're still fucking going with this shit? Give it a rest, take the L, move on with your goddamn week, holy fuck.
Most of their actual assertions are on the level of religious dogma. They gesture at "lived experience" and then make completely incongruous inferences from it
It still got closer to the actual point of the disagreement than 95% of the other comment threads about this. If that is how you see it then help them deconstruct those incongruous references, at least if you want this to be productive and not just more "fun" arguing.
I think establishing definitions instead of using buzzwords is Good, Actually
Oh you just thought I was taking a stance I'm not taking in this.
Relax, PLEASE.
I thought it was a good exchange overall, situational awareness is an important component of posting. I generally try to keep in mind the audience. Sometimes showing up to be combative when things are otherwise winding down can do more harm than good.
Man why do you all have to do the interrogation shtick? It's really jarring to have online randos looking into one's private life yanno?
The reason I mention it is because a lot of political understanding comes from working with other people towards shared goals.
This reminds me, are you going to get back to the reply chain where we actually talked briefly?
You said multiple times that there's not point talking to me and continued to insult me to third parties. What possible reason would I have to continue interacting with you?
And? It's clear y'all have no respect to anyone not groveling for your approval or walking lockstep with your praxis so you'll just continue to argue in bad faith. Even when I took the time discuss in good faith with someone who hasn't been a condescending pick yet, all I got in the end is being called a "wrecker" because y'all can't fucking accept anarchists not accepting your shit praxis.
You weren't groveling to me before and I was happy to discuss with you. You're imagining characteristics that I simply don't have
No, you just couldn't take "No" for an answer and became abusive instead. What's the point mate? What's there to discuss? Your buddies are now calling me "stormfront". There's nothing to achieve with arguing in good faith with hexbears, y'all are just looking for cheap gotchas to glom to.
Look dude, if you're ever ready to get down from your cross about how people other than me associated you with
when you posted a racist caricature and spent hours shitflinging with people who were calling it racist before uploading an edited version, you know where to find me and you know from the last comment I made in the one good discussion we had about what there is to discuss. Maybe you'll realize it tomorrow, or maybe you need a few years to learn about what socialists outside of Greece are like, or maybe you'll never get there. That's clearly none of my business to try and help you with, but I'm not interested in enabling your tantrums further now that you've shown me it's a switch you flip off and on. Good luck figuring things out.Goddamn, spare me the condescension. Every fucking time I try to be earnest with you people. Daym!
Anyway, In the past few days I've gotten a pretty good reminder of what the MLs outside my home country are like. Quite sadly It reinforced pretty much everything I expected of y'all.
Here you go, two minute music video to address everyone's authoritarianism concerns
I don't think we all have the same concept of what is an authoritarian
Another "both-sides" banger by ziq.
“Fascism is a form of radical authoritarian ultranationalism, characterized by dictatorial power, forcible suppression of opposition and control of industry and commerce.”
This is a useless definition of fascism. It describes basically any existing political-economic system. Even an anarchist system falls under it. Unless your anarchist system wouldn't maintain a monopoly on political power, forcibly suppress people trying to destroy it, and not have control over industry and commerce?
I don't really know where to begin with this essay. To try to take it apart point by point would take ages and it just hits on all the same points that liberals do anyway (and uses the same sources). I'm just tired of fighting with anarchist comrades. Maybe when the struggle gets to the point that this shit actually matters we can try to resolve our contradictions. Until then I'm fine working with anarchists in actual real life work that matters.
Funny aside, ziq hates me :D
Yeahh, zig hates everyone btw lol. They're one of those ridiculous "anti-civ" "anarchists" who basically exist solely online. Have you read their essays where they advocate for ending organized agriculture and returning to a hunter-gatherer subsistence lifestyle? Lmao
Any other definition of fascism I've seen includes the whole ethnic superiority/ social hierarchy aspect in the definition.
... Not that it makes a whole lot of difference what with Homo Sovieticus or N. Korean weird racial purity fetish but it's still disingenuous to leave it out
The most useful definitions of fascism I've seen are how it's primarily a response to a collapse in liberal economic order and certain sectors of capital find it useful to rile up popular suppression of leftist organizing. As in, capitalists hit the emergency button to maintain authority and drop the theater of democracy. In some cases fascists will represent specific sectors of capital, such as manufacturing, at the expense of other sectors such as finance. The ethnic superiority thing comes along with typical revanchist rhetoric about restoring order, which is the main plank of a standard fascist movement: "We'll get rid of the socialists and restore the previous order."
I really do think it's most practical to view fascism as an emergency movement. It's panic, it's frenzied stripping of the copper wires. Not to get into it here, but "peacetime" fascism is arguably modern neoliberalism.
I typically point to Robert O. Paxton's work. He's a liberal, but otherwise has a very good insight into fascism.
100%, I unironically view fascism as the second half of the boss fight, when Capitalism gets all red and angry and does double damage.
Fascism is not inherently as aggressively racist as the Nazis, though racial ideology seems to be an inevitable part of it. See how Mussolini wasn't exactly running racial pogroms, at least until Hitler pushed him in that direction.
Your characterization of those socialist states is wildly incongruous and misleading, but I don't think there's hope on moving that needle.
Im totally happy to hear explanations as to why it's not a racial superiority thing, I was just given to understand that N. Korea has an insane racial dogma and that the Hom Sovieticus was all about racial evolution.
Which was very trendy at the time. Doesn't mean it aged well.
I would encourage you to actually read about these topics and especially look at all at primary sources.
The idea of the New Soviet Man was simply that people are formed by their material conditions, so a new set of conditions in a society that fosters pro-social values and development would produce people who were different from those raised under the Czar or in liberal states. It is absolutely not a race thing. If you want to hear about eugenics being cool, try post-exile Trotsky (fuck him, he was a crank).
With the DPRK, I'll need a reference because otherwise it just sounds like one of the countless things just invented by South Korea or the US to slander them. My guess is that they just have their own version of the New Soviet Man as a matter of cultural inheritance from their involvement with the Soviet Union.
I expect the Homo Sovieticus misunderstanding on my part is a result of the terrible US high school system and some blending of Trotsky into mainstream Sovietism, thanks for the clarification!
While I'm equally unsure about the DPRK racial purity thing since you've challenged it I did find this article from Berkeley discussing it's roots in Japanese fascism.
If you read the article, there is an allusion to there being a book on the subject, but the only direct evidence presented is that quote from Kim Jong-Il, so I tried googling it and the result is basically three other sites plagiarizing the article and nothing else. If you are wondering, I placed the quotes on the second clause only because of the spelling of "homogenous" being variable, as you'll notice from the suggested search.
So basically "there's a book about it" is what is left of the claim. I do also find the history a bit weird since Koreans were treated as chattel by Imperial Japan and to this day the more reactionary parts of Japanese culture regards them as a foreign and inferior race, while mainstream Japan glosses over how much of Japan's population is ethnically Korean to make its own claims of homogeneity.
Do I need to try to dig up a digital copy of that book?
Edit: full disclosure, Trotsky supporting eugenics is a pretty obscure thing, I mostly just mentioned it as a dig at him. I doubt it really influenced the New Soviet Man perception even though he basically did assert that if America went socialist, there would be a New Socialist Man within 100 years that would actually be the product of eugenics, unlike in the Soviet case.
When the revolution comes, you will be forced to eat your veggies and go to bed at a reasonable hour
You made an irreverent joke, they respond with an irreverent joke, you respond with a flat insult.
Fucking why??? Is this me not understanding people or is this fucking bizarre?
I'm genuinely asking, whether it's normal or bizarre this confuses me.
People often confuse the shit outta me.
I think a lot of Hexbears are just kinda upset and mad at them for all the shit-stirring in the last few days. I don't really blame them.
I mean the way I see it, there was one initial incident of shitstirring, and it's just been escalating leftist infighting since then. It wasn't even originally made by db0, or in reference to hexbear specifically (but them sharing it was really the shitstirring incident).
To be blunt it seems like the magnitude of the hexbear response seems to have more to do with them being federated and given tacit permission to keep commenting about it here than anything else. There is a lot worse going on elsewhere that hexbear users don't invest this much energy in because it is less convenient to do so.
None of that really helps me understand this attitude/behavior that seems like whiplash between humor and hatred.
Well, as far as I'm aware it started with that awful "tankie" meme posted by db0 that portrayed MLs/MLMs as inhuman monsters rolling out the firing squads at the earlier opportunity. That thread blew up when our users saw it on our feeds and voiced their opinions with it. Since then, there's been a few more threads posted by db0 and they keep blowing up cuz it's usually something our users take offense to (like posting this essay by ziq, famous terminally-online "anti-civ anarchist"/ecofascist). I have only seen one thread by our users about db0 but that came after a few days of db0 posting threads like this intentionally calling out MLs or "tankies" in a bad-faith and provocative manner.
To be blunt it seems like the magnitude of the hexbear response seems to have more to do with them being federated and given tacit permission to keep commenting about it here than anything else. There is a lot worse going on elsewhere that hexbear users don't invest this much energy in because it is less convenient to do so.
Well, we are aware of places like lemmy.world with much worse politics. These threads just keep coming up in our feeds that we can reply to with our usual accounts. Db0 is free to ban us all or add a rule saying MLs can't comment in this community but that does sound a lot like "forcible suppression of opposition" lol.
None of that really helps me understand this attitude/behavior that seems like whiplash between humor and hatred.
If it helps, that's just kinda what Hexbear's site culture is like lol. People are very passionate about politics here and can get upset about people behaving in a manner like db0. That being said, I have seen a lot of constructive and calm conversations between our users and other instances' users about politics even when we disagree.
I guess site culture is an answer I can accept, if not have understanding of.
I can understand wanting to handle conflict with irreverence and humor. I can also understand being angry and hating each other. Behaving in both of those ways consecutively with very little transition is hard for me to understand.
Can you stop calling names? Rise above. We can establish a good conversation.
I think we, the various people of both instances, can have a good conversation. OP on the other hand has spent the last several days proving himself incapable.
lol you are accusing me of doing that hahehahahahaha
dude. if there is someone more marxist leninist than me I would love to met that person.
I'm merely commenting on it being a thought terminating-cliche. Anyway, don't kid yourself about being an ML from your leftcom circlejerk.
from your leftcom circlejerk
can't you just write normal? I have no idea what those terms are.
people tried that on the last two threads. OP has no interest in conversing, so now they get insults
I see it now.
You're a wrecker and that's all you seem to be.
Initially I thought you were just naive, then a troll. But your only aim is to wreck.
Have a shit day!
Initially I thought you were just naive, then a troll. But your only aim is to wreck.
Don't forget immature as well!
Of all means which wisdom acquires to ensure happiness throughout the whole of life, by far the most important is friendship.
what a fucking idiot. calling the Nazis "collectivist capitalism" what the fuck
Some of the earliest usage of the word "privatize" in English was in regards to nazi Germany lmao.
Hey ziq, while you're around, how are we gonna get rid of industrial society and organized agriculture without killing billions of people and using lots of authority?
The end of industrial agriculture means the starvation of billions of people. The earth cannot support billions of hunter-gatherers or simple subsistence farmers.
And many millions of people need regular medication and medical treatment made possible by industry to keep living.
The end of industrial agriculture means the starvation of billions of people. The earth cannot support billions of hunter-gatherers or simple subsistence farmers.
For some reason utopians online think otherwise. I don't think they realise what an accomplishment feeding billions of people is.
Nah don't worry I'm not taking about your comment. I'm talking about most "anti Civ" leftists. You're cool 😎.
Also the new Peppa pig profile picture lol
I’m hearing an implication that all anarchists are opposed to industry. Is this what you’re saying?
Nahh, definitely not. Big respect to actual principled anarchists (who don't spend all their energy tearing down and slandering the projects of others seeking liberation).
Ziq is one of those anti-civilization """anarchists""" seeking some kind of reactionary return to pre-industrial or even pre-"civilizational" society because of the belief that the problems of capitalism are actually endemic to post-industrial society itself. You can even go on their blog (raddle) and see them shitting on anarchists for believing a better world is possible. It's weird because at the same time these "anti-civ anarchists" advocate for the end of industrial society, they don't actually believe it's possible except through apocalypse, so their praxis extends to waiting until capitalism destroys the planet and then building their ideal world in the "deserts" left behind. Basically a kind of radical doomerism with politically inert and fed characteristics. The result of becoming conscious of the contradictions and effects of capitalism while never moving beyond the neoliberal worldview of "there is no alternative" which is also why you see them spreading the same usual liberal ahistorical bullshit about the USSR.
Literally "the deserter" (as in sand and this book)
I used to have raddle as the primary fallback for r/piracy but eventually moved it to lemmy and they were really upset about this "betrayal"
That's pretty amusing. I was told similar things for making a larger /r/traa replacement than them within five days. Their site is just janky, impressive considering how jank Lemmy is at times
So basically they're angry anti-fediverse trolls essentially. For what it's worth decentralization is much better for piracy communities and is arguably the future of social media, whether it's fediverse or something else on a different protocol.
Tankies praise these genocidal population transfers because they "lifted the peasants (that survived) out of poverty". But they are measuring "poverty" by materialistic, capitalist standards that are simply of no use to the subsistence farmers, hunter-gatherers and nomadic herders that made up much of the pre-industrial world. Before Lenin, Stalin and Mao's collectivization and industrialization, most peasants were largely self sufficient. Even those living in feudal territories, while by no means free, lived simple uncomplicated lives in harmony with nature; having no carbon footprint to speak of since industry was non-existent. Most enjoyed relative autonomy from the state (which had a far shorter reach), practiced mutual aid with their neighbors, and only needed to work a few hours a week [1] to produce all the food they needed to survive.
(emphasis mine) Bruh. Who do you think is the state? Is your feudal master (controls where you are allowed to shit!!) not the state?!
