• Moss@lemmy.blahaj.zoneOPM
    110·
    1 year ago

    Now personally I think we have the word takie pretty well defined in our rules and have no intention of changing it. Fuck tankies, they don’t belong here.
    I didn’t write fuck commies, or fuck libtards, (I am a vocal socialist and very far left) or anything like that, the banner is specifically about pro-auth dictator-worshipping tankies.

  • toothbrush@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    106·
    1 year ago

    some people want to post here but are repelled by “fuck tankies?”

    good.

    that is the intended functionality of the banner.

    Generally speaking, people offended by this are either:

    • libs that dont understand the distinction between tankie and communist or have been misinformed by tankies on what its supposed to mean, but are pro communism(wierd combination?)

    • the “CCCP did nothing wrong” people

    maybe having something leftist in the banner or some place like that could help the former, but I wouldnt remove the message, as it acts as a soft filter for the latter.

  • Glide@lemmy.ca
    91·
    1 year ago

    Tankies mad they’re being called tankies?

    Drawing a comparison to the use of “woke” is fucking hilarious. Only one of those terms is actually an insult, and the insinuation that both of those terms are the same says a lot about their perspective.

  • ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    71·
    1 year ago

    The fact they feel the phrase fuck tankies is acting as a barrier to their participation in 196 should be a wake up call for them to examine their political views.

    Unlike their use of the word liberal, which they use to refer to everyone to the right of them on the political spectrum, we are using the word tankie for a single specific group. Tankie means authoritarian communist. Please keep the sign.

    • build_a_bear_group [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
      26·
      1 year ago

      Tankie means anyone to the left of me that I don’t like, while liberal is a well defined political ideology that is based in a belief in bourgeois Democracy as putting ballots into a box rather than any ability to affect political outcomes, political struggle as idealistic and individual, and interactions and interpersonal relations always existing in a vacuum, without context or historical precursors. Liberalism is completely hegemonic and can be validly called out in a large swath of mainstream political tendencies.

    • jack [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
      17·
      1 year ago

      What’s your path to socialism that’s non-authoritarian? How will you dispossess the capitalist class without the imposition of state authority? Or defend from outside capitalist incursion?

      • ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
        7·
        1 year ago

        I am a social democrat. I think we should elect socialist politicians through our existing democracy. The socialist politicians will then vote on legislation to regulate the economy and ensure that corporations do not gain an outsized influence in the free market.

        • build_a_bear_group [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
          41·
          1 year ago

          Looks at Allende, the Indonesian Genocide, ÖSDAP, and the US Civil War… I am sure, this time the ruling class will just say “aww shucks”, and peacefully give up power, rather than fight to retain power like every previous time.

          • ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
            2·
            1 year ago

            Here in the US, the people rule. Since socialist policies are in the interest of the people, they will want to vote for politicians who support socialist policies.

            • jack [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
              47·
              1 year ago

              Here in the US, the people rule.

              This is literally objectively not true:

              https://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/princeton-experts-say-us-no-longer-democracy

              The US is not, and has never been, a democracy, because the people do not direct the actions of the government except on the margins. There is no democratic input on imperialism or capitalism. Those are invariate, and the system is designed to protect those from public influence.

              • ToastedPlanet@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
                1·
                1 year ago

                It’s crazy to see a far left news source be used to try to convince people that the US has never been a democracy.

                We have always been a democracy and we thankfully still are a democracy. We are in danger of losing our democracy to fascism however. If we don’t fix the flaws in our democratic institutions we will end up in a fascist dictatorship.

                I am well aware we are circling the fascist drain. I also know that the modern neoliberalism movement started by Regan and Thatcher is how we got here.

            • iie [they/them, he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
              13·
              1 year ago

              Study: Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens:

              From the abstract:

              Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.

              further down:

              In the United States, our findings indicate, the majority does not rule — at least not in the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the U.S. political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it.

              What is it, like, 70% of Americans want single payer healthcare?

            • aaaaaaadjsf [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.netEnglish
              10·
              1 year ago

              The people rule so effectively in the USA that the candidate with less votes has won 1/3 of presidential elections in the 21st century.

              How can you be a “democracy” if the candidate with the most votes loses the election? I thought that was the number one rule of democracy, the person with the most votes wins.

        • SoyViking [he/him]@hexbear.netEnglish
          17·
          1 year ago

          This has been tried many times and history shows that it’s a really effective way of getting yourself couped and get a brutal reactionary regime put in your place. The bourgeoisie is not burdened by any high-minded liberal ideals when it comes to preserving their wealth and power, they are going to do whatever it takes.

    • Franzia@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      4·
      1 year ago

      There is no one to the right of authoritarians who want to silence dissent and use violence to right the inequalities in society.

  • Depress_Mode@lemmy.world
    61·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, definitely not. “Tankie” isn’t some mostly meaningless word like “woke”, it’s a very specific belief in authoritarian self-declared, so-called “communist” states (USSR, China, North Korea, et al).

    They claim to be for revolution and then turn around and give 100% blind obedience to the newly installed leaders. Pointing out their immense power or bad actions gets you called brainwashed, a reactionary, or counter-revolutionary. They win gold in mental gymnastics in regards to how the new ruling class totally doesn’t count as a ruling class, how the state doesn’t count as a state, how the money doesn’t count as money, and how it’s still communism even though not a single one of those prerequisites has ever been met.

    They don’t take down systems of oppression, they replace them and refuse to believe it isn’t the greatest idea anyone’s ever had. Here’s a hint: if your “revolutionary” party demands absolute loyalty, they probably aren’t as great as they say.

    • protist@mander.xyzEnglish
      11·
      1 year ago

      I totally agree with your definition here, but I’d add there are some on the right who use this term to describe and dismiss almost anyone on the left. The right consistently wages war on language, co-opting words with existing definitions and changing them to suit their agenda. “Woke” is one example of this, as is “critical race theory.”

      • SkyezOpen@lemmy.world
        18·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think I’ve ever seen a mainstream right wing talking head say “tankie” and frankly I’d be impressed if they even admitted they knew the difference between the various factions of the left instead of grouping them all together. Seriously, “liberal” and “Marxist” are completely interchangeable in right rhetoric.

  • Hubi@feddit.de
    54·
    1 year ago

    Imagine simping for a genocidal Russia with their homophobic and transphobic laws and still wanting to post on 196. Good on you for keeping the banner up. Fuck tankies.

    • BirdyBoogleBop@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      1·
      1 year ago

      Look I am sure many of those places have done great things, like China’s recent wage cuts for rich bankers and pay rises for those lower on the totem pole, a good thing give credit where credit is due. But. How can you possibly remove the Bourgeois then place yourself at the top of the totem pole and not think of yourself as the new Bourgeoisie?

      Yes every violent revolution is going to be authoritarian because you have lined people against the wall and you are not going to get every dissenter in the first round and unsurprisingly they are going to be pissed. So now you have a violent government and and a violent opposition, not exactly fun times for everyone stuck in the middle, Which once that happens is not just the liberals as many hexbears use as an insult for everyone not Auth-Left but basically the whole political spectrum that aren’t on the far ends.

      A benevolent dictatorship is going to be the absolute best form of government you could possibly ever have but. You are never going to have one. The people at the top want to be at the top, and the people who want to be at the top are always going to be bastards.

      You think that Authoritarianism is needed to keep the revolution going. Definitely correct if you do it through a coup. I don’t want to be under a nation that will silence me or worse because I criticise them. You can call that counter-revolutionary if you like but I would rather have incremental improvements where things get better slowly than everything is worse now and you just got to believe that things will get better, and our leaders plans will all just work out.

      Tankie is a slur against Auth-Left. If you are Auth-Left well that’s the slur people who don’t like you are going to use.

      To pivot on what this original post was likely created for (admittedly in a pretty bad way). Hexbear is full of some really crazy people who have very strong opinions and shout memes that make sense in Hexbear but don’t really out of it. 90% of Hexbears just seem so unhinged. If I see someone from Hexbear it makes me skittish to actually start a discussion with that person as there is a high chance they are just going to be hostile.

  • kebabslob@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    52·
    1 year ago

    I say I have to agree. Leftist infighting is cringe AF. Disagree w/ people all you want, but gatekeeping and name calling is just silly

    • chumbalumber@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      76·
      1 year ago

      I think it’s reasonable to want to have a space that’s free from people that defend authoritarian regimes. From my perspective, at least, 196 has always been a more anarchist-oriented space, and I think it makes sense to try to preserve that.

      I’d also make the distinction that they are not banned from this forum, in the same way that libs are not banned from posting on their instance – but those that post there are generally met with hostility, and that preserves the character of their space. I don’t see why we shouldn’t do the same.

      • CoderKat@lemm.eeEnglish
        20·
        1 year ago

        Not to mention that this sub is unapologetically pro LGBT while practically every authoritarian government (including particularly those that tankies support) has been anti LGBT. eg, China prohibits same sex marriage and adoption, while forcing trans people to get permission from their family to transition (spoiler alert: they ain’t progressive).

        Democratic socialism with actual equality for all (which goes hand in hand with the root issue socialism is supposed to solve) makes sense and is reasonable. But that’s not what tankies support. They’re defined by support for authoritarian states that have nothing to do with equality except pretending that they care about it.

        • LaLiLuLuCo@lemmy.ca
          9·
          1 year ago

          Or how LGBT relationships and “sissy-men” get censored out the wazzoo in popular Chinese Media and on social media.

          Fun fact my mainland Chinese friends started saying “this humiliates China” without any other context on their social media because they weren’t even allowed to say they were lonely during lock downs due to censors.

          • CoderKat@lemm.eeEnglish
            1·
            1 year ago

            That’s great. Good for them. Personally, I’m a lot more amenable to supporting Cuba. While certainly still deeply imperfect, I see Cuba as largely the victim of American bullshit sanctions.

            But the fact that Cuba is better doesn’t change the fact that tankies regularly support China specifically. If you support two things, with one being good and one being bad, you’re still supporting a bad thing. So I don’t think your comment justifies support for China.

          • kay@lemm.ee
            3·
            1 year ago

            As opposed to the democratic political system in china I assume? I’m so fucking sick of American “leftists” simping for the boots they haven’t felt.

        • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tfEnglish
          3·
          1 year ago

          So should we who practice anarchism not be allowed because we don’t believe in Demsoc rhetoric? To me, most proposed demsoc systems would still be inherently authoritarian, as all states are. Especially by so empowering a state by giving it ownership of property instead of collective and direct control by the population.

          Am I not allowed because I think electoral politics are inherently anti-democratic and states serve primarily to create and protect the rich from the poor?

          Your appeal to democratic socialism as if it were common sense is concerning, because it reflects a lack of will to even entertain other perspectives.

    • cnnrduncan@beehaw.org
      17·
      1 year ago

      Nah g fuck authoritarians. Every time authoritarians take power the first thing they do is murder all the non-authoritarian leftists that fell for the “left unity” meme. And I reckon that making excuses for the genocide of minorities and oppression of LGBT+ folk is a bit of a shit cunt move.

    • Maturin@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      12·
      1 year ago

      Based just on what’s in this post and not knowing much history about it, I’m where you are right now too. If their concern is “tankie” includes unobjectionable stuff, we can at least give them the opportunity to give us some examples to make their point. If they can come up with stuff that we agree often gets the “tankie” label applied to it but is actually consistent with this instance’s core principles, then we should hear them out. But if they are like “well, CCP is actually based,” then no thanks.

      • philip_the3rd@lemmy.world
        20·
        1 year ago

        I’m an Eastern European leftie whose peasant ancestors (not all of them, obviously) suffered through famine, unspeakable state-sanctioned violence and extended prison terms during Stalinism and through decades of opression afterwards. The intergenerational trauma is something we’re all still struggling with. I cannot bear to hear the “Well, you need to break some eggs in order to make omelette”-type of negationist twaddle and I’m reminded daily of how the authoritarian postwar regimes have made it damn near impossible to resurrect the Left in the region. Don’t just fuck tankies, feed them rancid cum only.

    • theodewere@kbin.social
      17·
      1 year ago

      but… but… BUT THE NUANCES!! :‘’(

      a world without nuance, is a world without meaning for these guys… you know that… c’mon…

  • mashbooq@infosec.pub
    40·
    1 year ago

    I think if a person feels offended by a generic “fuck tankies” in the banner, then that person is probably a tankie. Fuck tankies.

  • Ilovethebomb@lemmy.world
    39·
    1 year ago

    They, and their Lemmygrad bretheren, can fuck right off. When they’re not minimising atrocities, they’re writing absolute fucking treatsies on communist theory, and in general, acting like insufferable twats.