Anti-communism has always been a reaction to communism (leftist movements broadly).
Anyone who unironically uses the word tankie... ever... is immediately written off in my book. They're terminally online and have never read anything, never thought about anything seriously, they're useful idiots for fascists at best and, a lot of times, just fascists.
I feel like they think I'm being hyperbolic or forcing a false dichotomy, but, no, if you self-label as anti-communist that's basically the same as modern day "all lives matter" people which was a right wing, reactionary, movement against the movement for justice for black people in the US. There is a movement which is objectively on the side of people, justice, etc. and there is a reaction to that movement. Just how it goes. If you identify on the reactionary side... well, there you go. Not sure why this is so complicated for the "bBUT TANKIES" dipshits.
Meh, I've embraced the term tankie I don't think it's that bad. Only terminally online people really care about a meaningless term.
If they use it to mean "person who doesn't get bogged down in stupid details over the USSR (or China) just for the sake of hating a communist country" then fine. I don't care. It just gets old seeing it used as "person left of me, which means they're bad" by the most historically illiterate motherfuckers on the planet. The kind of fuckers who say they want socialism and then cry every time someone protests in a street. Do you see what I mean? It's not the word, I don't care in the end. I get like a death threat per day from random Nazis who (ironically) call me antisemitic for criticizing Israel. I'll take tankie over that, given the choice. But it's worth acknowledging the people calling me or us or whoever "tankie" are absolutely just the dumbest fuckers online. That's all.
But it’s worth acknowledging the people calling me or us or whoever “tankie” are absolutely just the dumbest fuckers online. That’s all.
Lmao you said that and one appeared soon after.
This one seems a little less dumb than most. I think they're close to connecting the dots. They seem to realise that something is deeply wrong with their worldview and it is making them very angry so they're lashing out at what they perceive to be the cause ("Tankies" ruining socialism). I don't think I was too clear with them, certainly not patient enough, but I do hope they listen anyway.
Well indeed we can hope, though i wouldn't hope too much, i seen that pattern ending with doubledown enough times to
Showwarning switching on
Yeah, I don't think they will come away from this with anything other than "redfash tankies hate the truth! I owned them so hard!" But I think this will be another straw on the camel's back, not the one that breaks it, but will add to the load of doubts their have about their worldview.
If I put the cheese out too obviously the mouse will know what I am doing
But if I eat some cheese in the corner and, "oppsie" drop a small piece in a sticky trap area... I might just awaken to an angry mouse chirping at me.
Same. I think we need to expropriate the term from the lib/fash.
...socialist revolution is neither easy (as the Trotskyists and ultraleftists would have it) nor impossible (as the liberals and conservatives would have it), but hard. It will require dedication and sacrifice and it won’t be won in a day. Tankies are those people who think the millions of communists who fought and died for socialism in the twentieth century weren’t evil, dupes, or wasting their time, but people to whom we owe a great deal and who can still teach us a lot.
Or, to put it another way: socialism has powerful enemies. Those enemies don’t care how you feel about Marx or Makhno or Deleuze or communism in the abstract, they care about your feelings towards FARC, the Naxals, Cuba, North Korea, etc. They care about your position with respect to states and contenders-for-statehood, and how likely you are to try and emulate them. They are not worried about the molecular and the rhizomatic because they know that those things can be brought back into line by the application of force. It’s their monopoly on force that they are primarily concerned to protect. When you desert real socialism in favor of ideal socialism, the kind that never took up arms against anybody, you’re doing them a favor.
The quote
In the United States, for over a hundred years, the ruling interests tirelessly propagated anticommunism among the populace, until it became more like a religious orthodoxy than a political analysis. During the Cold War, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime’s atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn’t go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them. If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.
-- Michael Parenti, Blackshirts And Reds
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the admins of this instance if you have any questions or concerns.
When I learned this bot exists, gray and cloudy skies opened up and a bright beam of sunlight shined through my window alongside a beautiful rainbow.
Is writing bots hard? We need this bot and the sartre antisemitism quote bot over on Hexbear.
Never tried myself, but Hexbear does have that amazing whataboutism bot. Maybe it can be messaged and the owner can give feedback.
You could ask Kleeon how to set up a bot account, I think they are responsible for Amber bot and Whataboutism bot.
A liberal is someone who cant take there own side in an arguement.
And will twist themselves into knots insisting that it is really you who hold their position, not them.
That's my sentiment. Tons of liberals acting like they're not really sure what they believe in and they subconsciously assume they're completely wrong.
They do take "their" side. But you are correct: not ideologically, but materially they do.
See my fruitless argument with one below for an example of exactly that!
Yeah, I saw that. Genuinely frustrating. Essentially their argument was "I am a communist because I said it, and tankies aren't because reasons"
Anti-Communists only ever rear their heads about the West when a leftist wants to improve society somewhat.
How about this : https://www.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/s/VP82xj2W4l
Answer to that question is "no". The material conditions of both countries are way too different to even compare.
reddit is so dumb it's impossible to follow these tracking urls without having an account. how did they manage to fuck up just straight up links
A Reddit link was detected in your comment. Here are links to the same location on Teddit and Libreddit, which are Reddit frontends that protect your privacy.
