925
Transmission Error (lemmy.ml)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/memes@lemmy.ml
66 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 13 points 1 year ago (17 children)

I'm anti-tankie as the next guy. But pick up a history book. Soviet Russia did a huge amount of the work during WW2.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago (12 children)

    Any reason you're opposed to Marxism?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    I didn't say I was anti-marxist. I'm anti-authoritarian. In all it's forms.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (8 children)

    "Tankie" is just a pejorative for Marxist, though, like "commie" or "pinko." Marxism is "authoritarian" in that it expressly calls for flipping the Capitalist dictatorship of the bourgeoisie into the Socialist dictatorship of the proletariat, ie turning from a society where the Capitalists are oppressing the working class via the state into a society where the working class wields the state against the Capitalists.

    This isn't a real "dictatorship" in the modern sense, but a descriptor for where the balance of power lies, in the working class or Capitalist class, via Public ownership or Private ownership being primary. Socialism is still democratic, but will use the power of the state against the bourgeoisie. All states are authoritarian, what matters is which class is in control of the authority, and how we can move beyond class and thus the state.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Oh really? My bad. I've always heard it used specifically to talk about corrupted implementations of Marxism. E.g. Animal Farm.

    Err, maybe I'm confusing Marxism and socialism.

    I'm still not exactly clear on how any of it avoids corruption. At the end of the day, somebody decides whose street gets paved first.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago*

    Marxism is a branch of Socialism. The other major branch is Anarchism, and both Marxism and Anarchism have many sub-branches. For example, I am a Marxist-Leninist, which is generally the ideology guiding Cuba, the PRC, former USSR, etc. These are not "corrupted," they are real and thus face real problems that systems that only exist in the minds of dreamers don't have to. Marx would scoff at such dreamers that let perfection be the enemy of progress. I have an introductory Marxist-Leninist reading list you can check out, if you are curious and want to glance through it to get an idea of what Marxism-Leninism is all about.

    Secondly, Animal Farm. If you have the time, I think it would be worth reading A Critical Read of Animal Farm by Jones Manoel, and On Orwell by Roderic Day. Animal Farm is a work of fiction, written by an anti-Marxist Socialist. Orwell worked directly with British Intelligence to out Socialists and Communists, and kept a list of people he suspected were Jewish, due to his anti-semetism.

    Orwell is magnified by Western Countries because he's useful, he's someone that at least pretends to be Left but spent more time attacking the Left than anything. Even his comrades in arms in Spain, when he fought alongside the Anarchists against the fascists, questioned why he wasn't fighting on the other side. Animal Farm is chiefly a story about how the Russian Working Class was stupid and illiterate, and thus destined to be taken advantage of and could never hope to understand Marxism. Orwell spends an absurd amount of time describing just how stupid the non-pigs are, as describing poor, working folk as incapable of knowing their own interests is his critique.

    As for corruption, Marxist Socialism solves it with recall elections and broader extension of democratic input. Democracy in the workplace is utter fantasy in Capitalism, but is very real in Socialist countries. Even if this democracy often is flawed, and runs into the real problems that real, existing systems run into just like any other, it still forms a higher degree of public control.

    Hope that clears some things up for you!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    No, you’re not wrong. They’re muddying meaning of the word “tankie.”

    “Tankie” does not mean “commie.” Not all commies are tankies.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Again, "Tankie" is a pejorative for Marxist in the same vein as "commie" and "pinko." All 3 were used against Communists historically, though pinko seems to have fallen out of fashion.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    That is reductionist and overly simplistic. Just because they are all pejorative does not mean their meaning is identical. Not all communists are “tankies.”

    (But I know very well we need to agree to disagree on this, because I don’t think there’s any value in trying to convince you.)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

    Their meaning, historically, has been identical. All 3 have been used against the same Communist parties, the same supporters of Actually Existing Socialism, the same Marxists. Personally, I see the desire among some left individuals to drive a wedge between the "tankies" and the "true/good/real Marxists" as a way for these people to shut down uncomfortable conversations with the overwhelming majority of Marxists around the world.

    This process splits the "Marxists" that oppose AES, or advocate for reform over revolution, or support the Nordic Model, etc from the "evil" Marxists, the ones who support revolution, AES, and oppose Western Imperialism, giving a pass to the former because the former supports the status quo, which benefits Western Imperialism. Even if the overwhelming majority of practicing Marxists fit into the latter category, the former category are elevated in the West for their utility in supporting the system.

    What this creates in the minds of those who think "tankie" isn't a pejorative for Marxists is utter distortion of the real viewpoints and real stances of Marxists. The "good" aspects of Marxism get pushed onto the Western supporting "Marxists," and a strawman is built up for the evil "tankies" that ends up being a mixture of interpreting genuine Marxist analysis in a negative light with absurd contradictions that don't really exist.

    I don't think I'll convince you, either, but it's important for me to respond so that onlookers can at least see both points of view on the matter.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -3 points 1 year ago (3 children)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The Soviets were never "with the Nazis." The Soviets spent years trying to get the West to form an allied pact against the Nazis, insteas the West gave the Nazis Czechoslovakia. The non-aggression pact was paid to buy time, as the USSR was a developing country and Germany a more developed one. Nazism and Communism are diametrically opposed and cannot coexist, in the years of the Nazis rise the Nazis murdered the Communists in Germany first, and the Soviets were constantly warning about the Nazi threat.

    The surprise attack by the Nazis was swift, brutal, and with genocidal intent. They took land quickly, but were pushed back into a stalemate, and then rapidly the Nazi line collapsed. Lend-Lease equipment arrived after the Red Army had stabilized, it certainly helped but was not critical to the success of the Red Army, they weren't crumbling. Repeating Goebbels "Russian hordes" anti-Slavic racist talking points doesn't help you either, there are no records of "wave tactics" as was reported by the Nazis. Those records came largely from pre-Soviet Russian tactics, not the tactics of the Red Army.

    They didn't "fuck over" a bunch of countries either.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [+] -2 points 1 year ago (1 child)
    [removed by mod]
  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    I never rewrote anything. There were many pacts between Western Powers and Nazi Germany before the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, including non-aggression pacts from Nazi Germany with Estonia, France, Latvia, Lithuania, Britain, Italy, Denmark, and more. The Nazis broke the vast majority of these treaties, and it was only when war was on the horizon and the pleas from the Soviets to form an alliance against the Nazis that they conceded to the fact that the West was never going to willingly ally with the Soviets unless they had to.

    Further, the large majority of those who lived in the USSR want it back. This is extremely well-documented, because 7 million people died due to the fall of the USSR and the economic crisis that came with that collapse, along with the elimination of the social welfare that people depended on.

    The "meat shield" line is straight from Nazi propagandists using anti-Slavic racism (coincidentally, this line has carried over to today). The Red Army was very competent and didn't rely on "wave tactics" as a part of their battle strategem.

    This is nonsense anti-communism.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent