- cross-posted to:
- lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
There’s a fourth instance bloc the apolitical ones such as Mander.xyz and sub.wetshaving.social
I was told that !stick@sh.itjust.works is political, I guess wetshaving would be too
I just blocked one yesterday. Ain’t got no time for dat crap.
Even with everything that’s going on, I still don’t really care about someone’s beliefs or political views. It’s definitely harder these days for sure, but i still try. I’d much rather talk things out and understand someone before I decide to just hate them. The problem is that they are fucking rude and trying to start arguments all the damn time. It’s literally just the trolls that show up.
I’d much rather talk things out and understand someone before I decide to just hate them.
Looks like you care about believes and political views. You just don’t care about superficial labels.
That’s great, by the way. It’s the way to go.
I see what you mean. I do care, but it’s more like I don’t use it as a basis for why I don’t like people. Never been a fan of boiling a person down to just one thing about them. Unless you’re just straight up an asshole to people for no reason.
Tankies are right wing
I now think of Tankies as being Alt-Left, just as modern conservatives are Alt-Right. Both are extremists, both are okay to use violent upheaval of society to get their way, both routinely ignore actual facts in favor or alternative ones (bOtH sIdEs SaMe), both are nearly incapable of having any kind of normal conversation without dragging politics into it (just look at any “meme” or “comics” community, especially just after Luigi), both have next to if not fully zero consideration for the other part in any conversation, both use nearly identical methods like “control the conversation” and “gish gallop” and “the card says moops” (from Innuendo Studios’ The Alt Right Playbook series, but I notice that the tactics at least apply equally well to the Alt-Left) and so on.
Once you see it… you can’t really unsee those similarities. But they aren’t quite exactly the same, bc while they both shill for Russia, they use different talking points. So… there’s that, for whatever that might be worth (very little imho).
Are you a “Hitler was the real socialist” kinda guy?
Probably more of a “Soviet inspired systems aren’t socialist” kinda guy.
Sometimes. Libs sometimes as well.
The officially recognized definition of a Tankie is one who is a strong supporter of communism. Which, I think we all agree is considered a “left” wing ideal.
It’s also strongly authoritarian, but it’s solidly in the authoritarian left. So people calling others “Tankies” are, in theory, more right-wing than the people they’re insulting. It’s a left-punching insult.
Usually these people are strong supporters of China and the old Soviet Union and are staunch critics of ‘imperialist’ nations such as Britain and the USA.
They’re supporters of authoritarian dictatorships. Which is distinct from, and frankly incompatible with, the ideals of Communism.
There are definitely those who decided that communism wasn’t what it was, at took the label for themselves to try and fool their constituencies into believing their dictatorships were “for the best”… but they were never ideologically communist.
I wouldn’t say they’re strong supporters of communism per se, rather they’re attracted to the material trappings of communism. It’s red aesthetic fetishization.
Tankies aren’t monolithic, but the fact that so many of them idealize the modern-day imperialist government of Russia (and its right-wing ideology) indicates that they are either misguided or insincere in their stated beliefs. Opposition to the West is given more priority than actual leftism, even if it means endorsing fascism. Putin’s Russia represents the closest extant mirror to the idea of the USSR, if not its ideology, so it is idealized as its inheritor rather than its antithesis.
Similar is seen with China and its modern-day embrace of globalism and capital, despite still ostensibly having a communist government. It’s all about the aesthetics of the revolution, original intent be damned.
I’m pretty sure between an anarchist and a tankie there should be no question who leans further left and it ain’t the tankie
I mean, it really depends on the qualities that you utilize to define “leftism”. The real delineation between the two is their organizational hierarchy and tolerance of authority. Not exactly sure how that is used to determine who’s more of a leftist.
organizational hierarchy and tolerance of authority
Yeah, the communist dictatorships where the government controlled everything and dictated all of everybody’s environment down from the national level are pretty light on organizational hierarchy and authoritarianism.
Again the level of authoritarianism isn’t definitional in a lot of interpretations of left vs right.
A lot of people claim it to be purely economic, socialism vs capitalism. In this interpretation there are authoritarian and libertarian leaning people on both the right and left.
You will find out that on purely economic terms, the communist countries are remarkably similar to the classical Fascist propositions. They were mostly just forward with the same changes, possibly because the Fascists were killed after WWII and didn’t have a lot of time to continue on the changes they started.
(But yes, maybe the Fascists would stop before reaching the same level, we can’t know that.)
They are certainly not Right Wing though.
One, there isn’t some governing body for the term “Tankie”.
Second, the definition of Tankie means supporting China and Russia (TODAY RUSSIA) only because of their authoritarian policies, regardless if it is anywhere adjacent to actual communism or not.
For example, many Tankies will support any action Russia takes (which we’ve seen with Ukraine) if it opposes “the west”. And no one can argue that modern Russia is even kind of communistic.
Yeah I agree with this sentiment. Rather than seek understanding and openness, we should always strive to eliminate those who disagree with us, and never seek to progress our collective understandings especially through peaceful means. If you think about it, attempting conversion of another is immoral because it is an enforcement of your personal morality onto others. Therefore elimination and silence is the only just and good approach. Temporary peace among disagreeing parties is permissable, so long as it leads to the destruction, ostracization, or total exile of another group.
I get your point but also I think it’s nice there is a place I can go on the internet where I don’t have to deal with those weirdos. By virtue of the groups in question you are also framing “we should run society differently i think this way would be better” and “i don’t think gay and trans people should be allowed to exist” as a mere disagreement.
Right wing extremism isn’t an opinion
I think the main problem is that the majority of them come in ready to fight with their arms swinging. I’m down to have a normal conversation with just about anyone, but if you come in and just start insulting people and starting fights you can fuck right off.
