Seeing libs seethe about “too many tankies” is really funny.
Seeing libs seethe about “too many tankies” is really funny.
On stuff outside of lemmygrad, we are receiving a lot of hate, especially by those who just moved from Reddit. Guess they lost their hidden privilege at Reddit as their rhetoric used to be almost universal over there, while genzedong and our other subs get censored and banned. And now, on lemmy, their stuff isn’t universal, as we are more prevalent here. Seems like they really want that hidden privilege back
You're viewing a single thread.
I don't really consider myself a liberal or a communist. Maybe some mixture of both? I have my own ideals that probably align mostly with eastern philosophy, and maybe some more "esoteric" practices. Id like to think im well read, for being a mostly uneducated person, and I'm very accepting of just about everyone outside of violence or blind hatred, but I have never heard the term "tankie" until reddit. Is it a reference to Tiannemen Sq or something? Just curious as I like to know as much as I can. Thanks.
Also, as someone who's coming from reddit as of yesterday, it's kinda cool seeing more than one political ideal, as I really don't think there is a "perfect" system. Humans are flawed in their very nature, and tbh, we're a little late to "get it right".
Tankie is a meaningless term now, the deprogram just did an episode on it:
It’s also on other platforms like spotify etc.
I really loved Hakim's take on it being a very privileged position within the imperial core to scold those who see the state as crucial to sustained revolution.
yes! Same thing for how I came to understand the hatred for American soldiers. A lot of the cheering for the bad shit that happens to them comes from people who actually suffer from their actions, and made me examine how I viewed the military
That discussion was halfway identical to my own commentary on the term four years ago. It’s a vague buzzword about 90% of the time and I’m ashamed to say that I said it unjokingly in my Fedbook days. After I understood why the people’s republics were appealing to so many (rather than dismissing the defenders as mindlessly desperate), I let go of my grudge and quit using the term for anything other than comedic purposes.
Hearing that podcast made me wish that I could have a live conversation with Hakim. Although at this point I’d be interested in having a live conversation with any communist. In that format they’d be likelier to offer active feedback on the history that I share.
It's funny, I remember reading a takedown of this same article from criticalresist, https://lemmygrad.ml/comment/400717
Guess great minds think alike lol.
I agree, talking to other communists is awesome!
Honestly you might be able to contact him and have that conversation if you show him your commentary.
Lots of empty words these days. Lots of empty people too.
Is it a reference to Tiannemen Sq or something? Just curious as I like to know as much as I can. Thanks.
No, it's a reference to Khrushchev sending tanks into Hungary during the 1956 revolt. Leftist supporters of this policy within Western nations were referred to as "Tankies" since then the term came to generally just refer to Marxist-Leninists. That is until more recently when Tankie has come to mean just any leftist a person disagrees with.
If you're interested in leftist theory then go to Marxists.org, it has plenty of free literature. I suggest starting with the communist manifesto just to get a general idea of the principles of communism before delving deeper into Marx and Engel's work. (And maybe sprinkle in some Lenin too cause he's sassy and a great read.)
OK thanks for clarification (:
I read the manifesto in h.s. I was super into it back then, im very out of the loop though. Now if I'm gonna read some russian lit gimme some dostoyevsky. (;
Politics are kinda, I dunno, empty feeling to me anymore. I'm jaded AF though lol. I have some communist writings in my little library, maybe I'll dig through it for fun...but notes from the underground has my name on it. I read crime and punishment for the first time about 9 months ago and Whew what a doozy. Love that fever dream style.
That emptiness is a very common feeling. Learning and doing more absolutely helps with it, though. Look into the concept of revolutionary optimism a little bit if you start reading again.
I don't mean emptiness as in I feel empty inside. I know what that feels like, and that comes down to a choice. The universe is empty, it's full, it's what you make it. Happiness is a choice at a certain point..a perspective.
I guess I mean...I find more meaning in my day to day interactions with people at a human level, taking care of little things, playing music, feeling my emotions, letting them go, and just being alive. It's quite beautiful to be anything at all.
Politics can only get the human race so far, especially after we already fucked our shot up on this planet. I think there is too many people for anything to ever "work" and I think what we as a species and the earth as a planet would benefit from is somewhat of a soft reset. Not saying start a war, or kill people. Nah. I'm just saying we are way too far gone. We have lost much of what makes us human due to "politics", money, our garbage lifestyles, etc. Not saying it can't be fixed, but I think our issues are at a more fundamental level than a system of govt, and those are the things I try to address day to day in my own flavor of revolutionary optimism.
Like I said, I'm kinda jaded. I spent over a decade IVing dope, being extremely poor, and getting run thru the justice system for dumb ass misdemeanor possesion charges. I am clean now. My life is short and ultimately fairly meaningless, besides what I decide to find meaning in. I'm clean now. I'm happy. You could throw me in a ditch and I'd be happy.
Tldr: I'm more of a "spiritual" person than political. I can find redeeming qualities in many things, communism being one of them. I probably practice revolutionary optimism in my own way, day to day, with the people I encounter. Thanks for having a discussion with me, and entertaining my thoughts instead of being dicks. Appreciate it.
I'm not a huge fan of folks reading The Communist Manifesto as their first forray into socialism/communism. It was a pamphlet for workers in the 19th century and has some weaknesses if you're not part of that audience.
I would recommend Blackshirts and Reds by Michael Parenti to most people instead. We live under a more advanced stage of capitalism and it does a great job of explaining a lot of how "the reds" worked, who opposed them, and dispels common myths.
I figured as much. I was young lol.
I think The Communist Manifesto is on liberal curricula specifically because it doesn't teach the core ideas very well to a modem audience. Not your fault!
That makes sense ig. It wasnt on any curriculum though. I sought this stuff out. I was pretty political at one time, but i was pretty young. I think i understand the tenants of communism fairly well at a basic level but don't know the lingo and am out of the loop and would probably need a refresher (:]】
One of the main knocks, or at least an opinion or attitude I've developed towards communism is that it makes a whole lot of sense, and is quite possibly a "perfect" system, but humans themselves are extremely flawed, and don't lend themselves to the common good for the most part. Hence why you end up with heavy handed tactics for everyone to fall in line and stuff like oligarchy.
If you have any thoughts on that, feel free to jab at my little thought. For real I'm not that knowledgeable about it. I am into history and pretty much everything and try to self teach as much as I can yknow.
Understandable. Socialists need a glossary, lol. We use a bunch of terms basically nobody else does.
Communism, in terms of a state of being described by Marx, isn't utopia. It's just a predicted transformation of how humans relate to each other, and thr economic system under which they live, created through a basic liberation: what if the people who work to make all the stuff got the reins of power? And while the logic is more complex, the basic idea is that they would make their own lives easier and they would prevent other classes from taking over, and because of the nature of how stuff is made, that would result in the abolition of economic classes and high levels of production that sustain rich lives with less work over time.
Marxist thought attempts to reject idealistic thinking and instead ground its ideas in what is truly possible relative to how power and economic relations really work. It does not require any assumptions that humans are purely altruistic or anything like that.
With that said, humans have far more capacity for mutual cooperation and sharing and equitable justice than is commonly believed. Under capitalism, there is a cult of greed that tries to depict the extractive and violent relationship its own ruling class has with the others as a natural and even beneficial thing, and this cult of greed is very popular for a variety of reasons, the most important of which is that it keeps people from directing their frustrations at the party responsible for the aforementioned extraction and violence (the ruling class). This cult of greed is conflated with "human nature" despite the fact that both current and past societies exhibit all kinds of variation in how people relate to one another, and the most common forms for the longest periods of time were built on mutual giving and soft debts that were often communally written off.
Buy communism doesn't even really depend on societies becoming particularly altruistic like a light switch gets flipped or anything like that.
Finally, I should mention that communism is framed more as a long-term eventuality, and one that requires work and struggle to achieve. No communists expect to see it in their lifetimes. Instead, we expect that we can instead achieve socialist revolutions, which put the working class on top, a necessary precondition and also a massive intrinsic good in itself, as you can see in how peoples' lives are improved in countries run by socialists.
I think the historical impact of the text is probably the larger factor, though it certainly would be more likely to have been struck in the intervening time if it was more effective.
The Manifesto was written initially in German by two Germans, though Engels was a polyglot so he probably did several translations himself, at least the English and French ones.
That is until more recently when Tankie has come to mean just any leftist a person disagrees with.
While there are undoubtedly people that use the term like that, I think there is a general understanding that it refers to people that can excuse or support authoritarian or oppressive actions
But the terminology 'authoritarian and oppressive' doesn't really make sense in leftist circles where all states are understood to be just that by definition. I mean, that's why people are socialists. Tankie is lib terminology referencing anything that undermines liberal democracy. It only makes sense when coming from anarchists.
You've never had the pleasure of interacting with someone that can produce endless excuses for the USSR or PRC?
Found the lib
Sure 🙄
Yes, but that doesn't make them more authoritarian or oppressive because no matter what every state is using what it deems the most effective path to enforcing its will and if that means violence it will always resort to violence. It makes them bad communists.
It's not a matter of oppression or no oppression but a matter of oppressing the right people. If the USSR and PRC were perfect they would be a contradiction to their own purpose, no?
Look amigo, I get there is a lot of depth to be had in a discussion like this, but I'm just explaining what people generally mean when they say tankie.
I would agree they are bad Communists, but unfortunately they are extremely visible and influence how non-Leftists see Communists, which is why many Leftists are quick and eager to disavow any connection with them.
They are bad because they oppress the privileged, I assume. The privileged do not need communism. Leave communism to the unprivileged people.
No I mean like how homosexuals were persecuted
They were persecuted, sadly. Communist countries stopped doing that shit earlier than capitalist ones.
True, an example of this was homosexuality being decriminalized in the GDR (East Germany) in 1957, it was only in 1969 that the FRG (West Germany) did it.
for real. compare cuba and china with other countries in their regions.
It took West Germany 2 decades to catch up with East Germany re: LGBTQ rights. Tge USSR was the primary opponent of the Nazis, do you know what they did to anyone falling outside of the sexual or gender norms? Germany was a bastion for queer people before the Nazis took over - Nazis quietly supported by Western powers under the hope that they would kill the Soviets (spoiler alert: they tried to kill every Slav). During the cold war in capitalist countries, homosexuality was generally illegal, often criminal, and was used to blackmail people, and notably used against high profile civil rights activists.
Does that make the oppression that did exist in some socialist countries okay? Of course not. But they did much better than the capitalists, so it's ridiculous to choose that as your primary criticism. Socialism isn't a utopia and no socialists ever claim it is. It is a struggle, and the earlier it starts the better we can progress.
Cubs is currently running circles sround capitalist countries with its new family code. Were you aware of this?
I don't think reunified Germany has even caught up with East Germany on trans rights, though I don't follow it that closely.
Hey, I am one of them. The usa is always 100x worse, arguing does not change this reality.
Nobody was arguing that, two things can both do bad.
There is a world war going on and I have picked the side that fights against the usa.
thats fine honey
Words that can only be spoken by someone who's never tried to get together with others to change things for the better. You don't get to take an entire society and immediately make it equitable and free it of centuries of hangups. You do the revolution with the people in your country, warts and all, and struggle to make them better at the same time. You do not have the luxury of only organizing people that already 100% agree with you, nor will you be "in charge". And, let's be honest: any of us in charge would bring our own hangups, because all of us look back on ourselves 5-10 years ago and say, "wow that person believed some problematic things".
For example, the October Revolution and Russuan Civil War were fought by, believe it or not, Russians born (mostly) in the 1800s in a semi-feudal country without universal education and a large peasantry. The communists were incredibly progressive in comparison to the rest of thr country. But because they retained some of the harmful biases of their culture at the time, you write off the whole project and carry around little lists in your head about how actually they were also just "bad".
The point there is not that the USA is bad but that it is order of magnitudes worse, which means that opposing its enemies must be considered through the lens of "Does this help the US?"
To say nothing of the incredible amount of State Department propaganda that many western so-called leftists readily accept at the same time as "disavowing" the US as "also bad". If you believe the same things about the US's enemies that the US is actively campaigning to make you believe, that is a red flag.
If you believe the same things about the US’s enemies that the US is actively campaigning to make you believe, that is a red flag.
I agree
It's good to endlessly excuse the USSR and PRC, as most criticisms of them are bullsit that is only believable by people with poor knowledge of history and zero capacity to critically engage with the media. Unfortunately, this is basically everyone under capitalism.
It’s good to endlessly excuse the USSR and PRC
It really isn't
I suggest you read the entire argument before responding to it.
"endlessly excusing" is mutually exclusive with "critically engage"
Usually it means someone that actually reads history and will specifically debunk common anticommunist myths about it, i.e. historical revisionism.
The term "authoritarian" is also used selectively by anticommunists and this pervades capitalist societies, who continue to teach cold war nonsense. It is implicitly reserved for actions of the state, for example, but this is a false distinction made solely because after any kind of a left takeover, the state is the most powerful tool the people have. Universal government healthcare is authoritarian by this selective definition. On the other hand, the assertion of massive control over people's lives is not described as authoritarian when it comes from the private sector. Workers spend 8-16 hours per day working in petty dictatorships, working around the personalities and whims of business owners and managers, just to ensure some kind of steady income lest they lose basic human security. They are forced to migrate by poverty forced by capitalism, this system creates marginalised groups and then (sometimes slowly) treats them genocidally. Much of it was built on colonialism and neocolonialism, with the richness of the West built on uneven exchange with everyone else, a system set up at gunpoint. None of this is described as authoritarian.
Please read more widely.
Much of it was built on colonialism and neocolonialism, with the richness of the West built on uneven exchange with everyone else, a system set up at gunpoint. None of this is described as authoritarian
I would agree those are authoritarian
After being prompted, sure
I would gladly recognize the American empire's atrocities, I just didn't think it was necessary since most left-leaning spaces are up to date on them, and it would largely be preaching to the choir.
My point is about the unconscious selective use of language, in this case to vilify communists. It's not a coincidence that the term pops up so often in the imperial core to crap on (usually BIPOC-led) successful revolutions and their theory, usually anti-imperialist struggles. Double standards and uneven emphasis are the primary tools of propaganda and they'll have you doing their work for them for free.
unconscious selective use of language, in this case to vilify communists
That's true, the Red Scare has had a lasting impact on American culture, and that impact can still be seen in vocabulary today.
the term pops up so often in the imperial core to crap on (usually BIPOC-led) successful revolutions and their theory, usually anti-imperialist struggles
There is certainly a racial aspect to it, some of the most dehumanizing things I've ever read were about China and Communism specifically, but I don't think that precludes legitimate criticisms of authoritarianism.
The inconsistency of even using the term makes it more or less useless for categorizing anything meaningfully. In practice, it has become an aimless pejorative that seems to have more utility as an anarchist dog whistle for identifying each other than having anything meaningful to say about anything else.
There's the etymology of tankie and there's the actual ways it's used. The etymology is rolling tanks into Hungary in 1956, which caused a solit (among many) among UK communists (who came up with the term). The usage varies wildly because liberals don't understand politics very well and slap it on anything to the left of Obama.
Communista understand politics through a series of criticisms of capitalism and a framework by which to understand those within it, namely economic classes whose interests align/do not align depending on the material context. You might find that some of this appeals to you, as a material grounding is more common in Eastern traditions than Western. Also we are super duper correct, so we've got that going for us.
Re: flawed humans, there are of course a variety of people out there and we all make mistakes. However, it's also important to recognize tgatva lot that is attributed to "human nature" is actually fairly recent and is either a consequence of living under the capitalist system (which came into being over a period of about 1000 years) or is just a myth spread to justify the violences done by that system to the common person.
And re: perfection, you might like us there, too. We view the political economic system as an evolving thing that changes relative to material conditions. There is no perfext system, but there are valid struggles to replace the current one with systems that prioritize people over profit. For example, no communist would say that socialism is the solution to hunter-gatherers in Crete because hunter-gathering Crete isn't capitalist - the idea would have no meaning. We also know and expect that the fight doesn't stop even after a revolution, that there will still be struggles for a long time - but at least we could fight them together and with greater agency.
Hey thanks for writing that.. OK so you've confirmed my general understanding of the idealogy.
After I wrote that I knew you were gona come back with something about capitalist perspective and long term goal. So that was a good refresher for me I appreciate it.
I feel like there is too many people still tbh lol.
Capitalism doesn't work. I've been through it and it's underbelly enough to know that. I do think the wealthy west has distorted our view of ourselves. I'm aware of that. I try to come at things as objectively as possible, though sometimes I fail.
I sort of agree with the main tenants of communism absolutely. I do consider myself somewhat of a socialist, tho I'm more a broad strokes type person, hence I sort of default to self betterment and mindfulness, while trying to bring a base understanding of our nature through my interactions to others as a way to better the world. My perfect system would be living close to the land, hunter gather style. Im kind of a hermit tbh (: there too many people for me lol.
I bookmarked your comment. I'm gonna revisit it later. Appreciate the talk.
Edit: fwiw, I do believe at a fundamental level, people are good, and we are in agreement about things more than we disagree. We just have a track record of complicating the simple ime. Im guilty as well.
Thanks for being open-minded!
I might say that capitalism does work, but only for the ruling class (business owners) and those they can rope into doing their anti-worker dirty work. The system isn't broken and need fixing, it's working exactly how they want it to and it must be destroyed.
Being vaguely socialist is 100% cool btw. No need to get too deep into labels. The most helpful thing is to be class conscious and be active in your community in a way that's cognizant of that. Helping people get better wages, win unions, support politicians antithetical to capital (they're very rare and nobody in the squad would count), support strikes, support social housing, oppose war that your country supports, and so on. Never supporting cops in capitalist countries. Diving deep into left theory is handy for doing those things better and having clear eyes about what is coming next, but it's less important than doing some of these clearly good anti-capitalist things. It can also help you choose a group to organize with, as some groups are do-nothing orgs.
Also nothing wrong with wanting to live in a smaller community or even a reclusive life. Alienated city life is an imposition that violates the connection and community most people want to have. Folks can't plant roots long enough to know their neighbors, let alone create a community. That's a consequence of real estate, rent, and unemployment, a whole other can of worms.
There's a recent book you might enjoy called The Dawn of Everything. It's co-written by David Graeber, who had anarchist leanings but respected Marxist thought. It has many examples of societies defining and redefining themselves relative to material conditions snd relative to one another.
It warms your heart when you see Liberals actually coming here with an open mind and actually wanting to learn more. Wish we could have more of that. Too tired of all the bickering.
Sounds like a good book, i definitely have anarchist leanings, though i do acknowledge that prob wouldnt work atm lol. ive bookmarked your comments. It's hard not to be class conscious when your a victim of class warfare, tho some have definitely had it worse than me. It's becoming less about racial lines, and more about rich poor.
I'd like to think I do my part day to day in what little way I can, even if it's just making one person a little bit more conscious of their own situation yknow.
Enjoyed the discussion so far thanks.
There's plenty of value in reading anarchists, of course. Reading widely is the best bet, as one can become limited and engage in bad practice if they become too embedded in factionalism. Not that it's always wrong to have fights, just that it tends to end up being pointless and based on the people picking fights having their ignorance exploited by ruling class propaganda.
The ruling class under capitalism had and rediscovers many weapons for combatting class consciousness, unfortunately. Living as a worker under capitalism tends to breed a nascent class consciousness through (Marxist term) exploitation, but it needs shaping through education. Unfortunately the ruling class can redirect that nascent class consciousness into a false consciousness of division, condescension, and hate. As an example, whiteness and blackness, and particularly anti-black racism, were literally invented as a form of social control to divide European bonded laborers from African slave bonded laborers and then later exploited to phase out bonded labor of Europeans entirely while still maintaining control over black slaves. An often-ignored fact is that Bacon's Rebellion was an integrated, class solidarity action of a variety of people in bonded labor, European and African and more, and that the ruling class's response to this was to invent racial economic rules and guarantee societal race privileges as a substitute for economic ones.
We can see the same thing play out today, where bosses and management point the finger at "illegal" immigrant labor (a proxy for the predominantly brown labor underclass) for (usually white) workers' ills, when it's of course the bosses picking all workers' pockets.
Same game plan had worked for about 400 years and it requires resistance and organization, the bedrock of communists' work. It's also not restricted to race - the ruling class applies this tactic and tries to split based on:
- Gender
- Age
- Nation of origin
- Language
- Religion
- Job class
Basically... we've got work to do in order to avoid increasingly fascistic outcomes, as fascism is just a particular form of false consciousness imposed by the ruling class to deal with crises of capitalism, and it is increasing in visibility with every crisis.
PS not trying to get you to go do commie things, just wanted to add some context on how class consciousness is not inevitable from our working conditions. We are all in our own states of mind and at different points of how we can and want to do extra work.
I've also enjoyed the discussion.
Now see what your saying here just comes off as common sense to me lol
Your preaching to the choir with that one (:
Just to add some things not mentioned by the other poster about tankies, 1. They deny any sort of atrocities committed by communist regimes, 2. They believe in "socialism for one country", which means for example the subservience of the countries in the warsaw pact to the Soviet union (like previously mentioned the name tankie comes from tanks rolling into hungry) 3. Support of previous Soviet countries such as Russia, under the guise of a united front against fascist/capitalist US supported nations
To me, from a random common person, I can not abide by anyone trafficking in human suffering. There has always been a ruling class, in every form of govt. Communism is no different.
Atrocities just take different forms, forms of human nature.
It's a constant battle with our own biology.
I'm the opposite of an authoritarian. Quite frankly I hate anything that takes itself remotely seriously. To imagine kicking up violence in the name of personal gain, is to imagine being stupid. I don't want to be stupid.
The answers are seemingly beyond our grasp at every turn. I believe this is due to our innate qualities as humans. And this is just what it means to be alive.
We are climbing the ladder of evolution. Whether we make it past this bottleneck is yet to be decided, but I believe discussion like this is what pushes the boundaries of our own imagination and awareness, of our place in the world and the battle to make life better.
That is all.
Yeah, I just wanted to clarify things that the other poster didn't really acknowledging, that is that the communists in this community is kind of a fringe subset of communism. Obviously discussion is very good and I'm not opposed to the posts here, but if you are not particularly interested in authoritarianism, any derivate of Leninists you might not be comfortable with
Yea I'm a bit ignorant on all that so thanks for clarification.
You actually have touched on something that I was wondering about.
Why are these authoritarian regimes not considered a ruling class? I mean they are basically royalty.
I just don't see a justification for some of these things from a communist poverty, besides control, "for our own good". But it's obvious these are not good people and are just a different flavor of the scum bags that run DC. All profit, power, gain. The workers take over, a new ruling class takes over. Rinse repeat.
I don't see that cycle breaking unless there are far far far less humans populating the earth.
I don't know.
It's kind of an extension of the communist party being 'the vanguard' of the worker movement and that the societies which communist revolutions took place wasn't really capitalist (Russia was more agrarian) so an intermediate step was required to move onto a 'real' communist society. Enter the 'dictatorship of the proletariet', purpose of is to move the country along and set up the requirements for communism. This dictatorship would then naturally go away as the country moved to communism. After Stalin took power the dictatorship took on other facets that basically made it a permanent feature.
So to answer your question it's because it's deemed necessary to have a 'ruling class' and to have hardship to eventually move onto communism.
Hmm. I was afraid so. I'm not sure how I feel about that. Sort of feels like pretext to me.
Perfect communism could probably only work with a small group of people so it's pretty much a constant state until a mass extinction event happens. ..all the while you do in fact have a shitty ruling class.
Luckily there are other left ideologies that are more palateble than leninism and marxist-leninist, like Democratic socialism, anarchism and such. Lots of reading can be done 😃