Good but you need a flag that represents liberals pummeling the commies instead of the right
Liberals are the right, silly 😂
Concerning
The pirates are missing here
ahem
DO WHAT YOU WANT CAUSE A PIRATE IS FREE
YOU ARE A PIRATE
Sorry, was just talking to the local fishwife.
As a bearded man who built a cannon, has sailed on a large body of water and channels a torrent of bits across his home network. Yar!
When have “libertarians” ever won a physical fight anywhere lol. We have actual revolutionaries who fought on the frontlines like Che and Castro, Lenin, Ho Chi Minh, Mao.
you have this goofy cartoon
Lenin was a tyrant who strangled the revolution in the cradle.
Lol, I’ll bite. How do you think that Lenin strangled the revolution in the cradle?
By banning the workers councils and overthrowing the democratically elected menshiviks before making himself a Tsar in all but name as well as paving the way for Stalin to take power.
The worker’s councils were recreating the basis of capitalism and interfering with regional and national interests in favour of their own petit-bourgeois aspirations. They wanted to become a labour aristocracy and they threatened the economic foundations of proletarian democracy with their narrow, self-interested trade union consciousness. Yugoslavia’s model is a perfect example of what would have happened if this was allowed to proliferate and to threaten the revolution.
If the Mensheviks didn’t want to get outlawed then maybe they shouldn’t have aligned themselves with the interests of the aristocracy and the Kadets over the proletariat 🤷♂️
Imagine being salty that the October Revolution overthrew the bourgeois Provisional Government. The soviets had established themselves as the legitimate organ of proletarian power and they seized political power because the Mensheviks and the Constitutional Democrats did not represent them.
The best part of comments like yours is trying to figure out your ideology. Could be anything, really.
Lenin was a tyrant? By that logic, every white person is a terrorist.
#snek ❤️🐍 #commies 🚫😡
Me the anarchist just enjoying the fight.
I’ll tread where I must
I promise not to tread on you if you promise not to tread on me.
And thus was society born
Oh, well in that case. I’ll tread on your mom.
“Don’t tread on me (while I tread on EVERYONE AND EVERYTHING AROUND ME and make it my whole personality then screech about treading on me if you mention it)”
Or be like the guy in the projects near my house - “DON’T TREAD ON ME (unless it’s to subsidize my housing costs with government funding)”
Both have severe branding problems. Right-wing authoritarians stole the Gadsen flag, and left-wing authoritarians started governments and called it communism.
I just took a cursory glance at this Gadsen flag’s history and meaning, and it’s indeed removed from the bunch of wackos wanting to throw slurs around that co-opted it.
left-wing authoritarians started governments and called it communism
Tell me about it… It’s infuriating to be automatically associated with regimes that were just repressive hegemonies with a red facade; meanwhile, anti-authoritarian communist figures like Rosa Luxemburg are simply ignored, or worse, put into the same dirty bag.
Rosa Luxemburg
Clearly I have some homework tonight
It always irks me when someone flies it along with a thin blue line flag. The true history and meaning of Gadsden flag is amazing and if most people knew it they would appreciate the flag too and not just see it as a redneck flag.
As much as I try, I can’t unsee the redneck flag in the modern context.
People who fly that flag now don’t want the gub’mint interfering in their lives…unless that gub’mint hates the same people they do, then it’s “tread on me harder, daddy!”
Everyone is fine with authoritarianism when it’s working in their favor or in line with their ideology.
Speak for yourself. Authoritarianism is diametrically opposed to my ideology.
I hate both.
Average both extremes are bad enjoyer
Nah im just a extremely authoritarian nationalist /s
@CookieJarObserver @yeather, I’m an old extrem don’tgiveafuckcommonsensist
deleted by creator
A guy tried to report me to get me banned because I have a Classical Liberalism (right-wing Liberalism) community but he literally reported me to myself. Like… ???
Lemmy dev: Imma name my main instance after Marxist-Leninism, to call my true comrades!
Lemmy Users: Fuckin Tankies Go Home
(This is actual praxis to be clear)
Shut up and eat your Engels-Flakes, you’ve got only 5 Minutes before you have to get your Gulag-Train-Wagon to Lenin School. I can’t allow that you come late to class again and fail Che Guevarology!
The wheels fell off this one for sure
Disrespectful electronic gay generation
you called?
Could we not fetishize violence? Even against the “right” victims?
More of a state of affairs than an endorsement. I probably could’ve made this meme better.
Maybe I’m reacting to the bloodthirsty comments.
I’m not a “tankie” but I’m not a bloodthirsty lunatic either.
Why can’t people just be more fair to an authoritarian regime that’s actively crushing democracy?
To all the tankies, China is fascist now. They aren’t redistributing wealth from billionaires to the people, they’re welcoming billionaires into their party with open arms. Not exactly the standard bearer for your glorious tankie revolution LOL.
deleted by creator
Well, they have demonstrably increased the quality of a life of over a billion people under Dengism.
…
And they’re doing a little genocide. Well, objectively a lot of genocide.
Like, a lot a lot. Of ethnic and religious minorities. Plus, they come off as a bit nationalistic.
Maybe we should come up with a new term for them?
Some kind of social nationalists?
deleted by creator
Maybe we should come up with a new term for them?
Some kind of social nationalists?
Yeah I guess the name National Socialist is already taken.
Ah to be a teenager again
Commie: Never thought I’d die fighting side by side with a Neo-Nazi.
Nazi: What about side by side with a temporary political ally to seize power?
Commie: Aye. I could do that.
Seems a bit much.
What’s wrong with you people? You’re cheering on fascists when they beat up communists? Shouldn’t you help instead?
MLs aren’t communists.
Stalinists aren’t communists.
ML works just fine if you assume a benevolent dictator with a merciful, honest, and well educated population of party leaders who will listen to agricultural, industrial, and economic experts instead of taking a hard line ideological stance on everything and not try to force the abolition of personal property before society is ready.
Should be easy, right?
That’s not what the meme is saying.
Hmm, is it criticizing lemmings for cheering on fascists beating up communists?
There’s no intended camps in the image. It’s just a bunch of individual infighting.
Are we looking at the same image? How’s that the correct interpretation?
dumbass vs dumbass bro, i am just lolling at both
exactly!
help the “fascists” would be fun but I can just sit back and enjoy the show.
Since when were libertarians fascists?
Since that flag tried storming the capital building. I actually like the original meaning of the flag, but it got cooped by meat heads. I do like the pride and women’s rights versions of the gadsen flag.
We’re taking the Gadsden Flag back! The right doesn’t own it. It belongs to the people and we’re taking it back!
What’s the point? Gadsen was a slave owning piece of shit. It’s a dumb flag.
Sometimes a shithead can be right about something.
How many high-minded ideals were written by people that were absolute assholes or monsters in the other parts of their life?
I’m not sure if you’re aware of this, but flags are inanimate objects that lack the ability to make conscious decisions like “storm the capitol.” People make those decisions, and people can carry whatever flag they so choose while doing so whether they embody the meaning of that flag or not, as evidenced by much of those same people also carrying conflicting thin blue line or maga gear. They could have chosen to storm the capitol carrying antifa flags, and besides the fact that you’d likely be cheering them on rather than admonishing them for the same behavior exhibited by your percieved enemy, the flag waved would largely be inconsequential to anything other than “your support.” In fact, you’d likely point out that ~1,003 have been charged from the incident which is not only a small percentage of the total supporters of either side, but is a small percentage of the crowd that was even at the rally that started it, meaning more people who fly either of those respective flags didn’t “do it” than did.
Of course, that isn’t propaganda-y enough for most, or is too propaganda-y because I’m only supposed to talk bad about one side not both. Oh well, c’est la pipe.
Even if they aren’t fascists, I wouldn’t side with anyone that agrees with Atlas Shrugged
The author of that book didn’t consider herself libertarian, and educated ancaps usually do not consider herself one of their own.
That is, apparently you’ve never met one yet write such pretentious phrases.
Her views are 100% bog standard modern “libertarian,” because her works are the most significant factor in the shaping of those beliefs, but in her day libertarians were anarchists just beginning the ideological split into today’s actual libertarians and anarcho-capitalists/“libertarians”/racist and pedophilic liberals and fascists lying about their real goals to useful idiots.
Rothbard, famous racist, slave desiring, apartheid supporting, pedophile ideological founder of anarcho-capitalism, who has quite a lot of suspiciously pro-fascism quotes, technically started the process in the 40’s, but it didn’t gain steam or co-opt the term libertarian until the populatization of “libertarianism” thanks to Rand’s works.
So yes, everything you just said is technically correct, but is still deliberately misleading in modern context.
Her views are 100% bog standard modern “libertarian,”
Wrong. She praises monopolies, hierarchical systems with hereditary aristocracy, money bending rights, some people being more human than others etc. She’s rather very roughly Darwinist, with the idea that the less you try to compensate for strength disparity, the better, and at the same time she’s rather centralist. Almost fascist.
Basically she’s an inverted Bolshevik, which is not surprising considering her family history. A Bolshevik from capitalists, if you like. Not even similar to libertarianism. Her ideas have simply nothing to do with liberty. She was sufficiently honest to explain these things herself.
and anarcho-capitalists/“libertarians”/racist and pedophilic liberals and fascists lying about their real goals to useful idiots.
I’m ancap (rather distributist as in Chesterton’s views, but that’s harder to explain), so this BS you can leave to yourself.
I’d generalize this as anarchist ideologies attracting people who’d like to get rid of certain limitations most others would consider sane. Like fucking children, stealing, killing etc. This is, sadly, a real tendency, but I’ve met such leftist anarchists too.
Rothbard, famous racist, slave desiring, apartheid supporting, pedophile ideological founder of anarcho-capitalism, who has quite a lot of suspiciously pro-fascism quotes, technically started the process in the 40’s, but it didn’t gain steam or co-opt the term libertarian until the populatization of “libertarianism” thanks to Rand’s works.
You forgot to say that he also kinda liked USSR, at least in his book, “For a new liberty” or something, a very interesting person surely.
Also Rothbard’s and Rand’s followers were always very different people. I’ve never met a person who’d like both. It’s a bit like tankies think that “liberal” and “fascist” are synonyms, completely removed from the reality. If you want to have some idea about libertarians, you should talk to them and not your leftist friends.
So yes, everything you just said is technically correct, but is still deliberately misleading in modern context.
It’s especially important in modern context. Ayn Rand is basically a spoiler for libertarianism, a strawman which every leftist uses against people whose ideology has nothing in common with her. And in reality she was just, like I said earlier, for capitalism what Bolsheviks were for leftist ideologies. Rather economically misguided and too impractical.
LMAO- The only dignity your lies and cope deserve.
I mean, you can just read the sources, Rothbard’s most known books, Ayn Rand’s Atlas and other stuff, and make your own opinion. The only common thing between them is disdain for state regulation and leftism. But the root of Rothbard’s ideology is simply incompatible with the root of Rand’s ideology.
The former builds on natural right and non-aggression. The latter builds on people not being equal, and some being shit under the boot of others, better and more useful. These are in direct conflict.
I mean, explaining something to a tankie is similar to trying to teach a pig fly.
Tankies aren’t communists, they’re authoritarians with the red aesthetics. They agree with fascists on every valuable part of their worldview, and only disagree on which historical genocidal dictator was totally innocent actually
So you’re saying communists are fascists now?
In before you say Stalin’s spoon actually killed 100,000,000 Ukrainians
I really want a good explanation for why the dumb shit admin thought it was a good idea to federate with tankie fucks
We’re defederated on Beehaw if you want to go there instead
Go cry to him then lmao, what the fuck do you want us to do about it?
To stop being tankie retards and shut the fuck up
Again, there’s no point in telling me this lol. Go cry to your admin to defederate from the big bad tankies that give you nightmares.
Yikes. Sounds like a personal problem. Maybe don’t engage with “tankies” if you don’t like them?
lemmy.ml admins? Same admins as lemmygrad.ml.
As to lemm.ee: Here’s the policy. Long story short: Tankies don’t go harassing lemm.ee communities and aren’t doing illegal shit, spam, suchlike, elsewhere so they get a pass.
Pretty sure he’s saying the exact opposite. Russian/CCP simps aren’t communists. They’re just a different flavor authoritarianism then the maga chuds.
Can you please explain how the Communist Party of China isn’t communist?
Also, are you suggesting the US isn’t “authoritarian” or do you just mean countries you don’t like?
This is like really basic geopolitics my dude, China is a thoroughly capitalist economy by any definition that isn’t being massaged specifically to exclude them.
Maybe do not try to use basic geopolitics to answer a question of political economy?
… is this supposed to be some sort of gotcha? Did I commit a whoopsie by using the term geopolitics to refer to how one of the top 3 global superpowers runs its markets?
deleted by creator
The same way the DPRK isn’t democratic.
Which it is, thank you for proving that the CPC is a communist party.
How do you define “democratic?” Would North Korea be democratic if there were two candidates instead, where they fought in a pretend culture war, but one of them really just deferred to the other if they won? North Korea has different parties too, you know.
Now you’re being dense and bad faith.
Because anyone can call anything what they want. Is the Patriot Act very patriotic? Call something what it isn’t and mock people who call it out. It’s a form of double talk.
Let me be blunt then. Has the People’s Republic of China achieved the final stage of communism? Of course not, that would be ridiculous.
Are they trying to work towards communism and improve the conditions of their population? I would say so.
I would not. They’re trying to erase the cultures of any non-Han Chinese and suppressing any lgbt groups. How does that support the “from each according to his ability to each according to his need” creed?
Authoritarian regimes like to call themselves different names with better connotations than they deserve.
Anybody who screeches about authoritarian regimes exposes themselves as being intellectually bankrupt, and can be safely ignored. A great explanation of why this is a nonsensical narrative peddled by western pseudoleft https://cym.ie/2020/04/01/left-anti-communism-the-unkindest-cut-by-michael-parenti/
Don’t you call America an authoritarian regime on an hourly basis?
Can you explain why MLs are not communists? With your own arguments.
No, because MLs aren’t necessarily tankies. And I do consider tankies a subset of Communists. Just not the very bright subset.
“Tankie” means someone who’s more interested in following a communist team rather then a communist ideal. Even if the team leader is just a grifter.
If you acknowledge the short comings of certain states that don’t really follow the “from each according to his ability to each according to his need”, you’re not a tankie.
Anarchists follow their team too; they’re opposed to any state whatsoever, no matter what the character of that state is and no matter the achievements of that state. Their team is the abolition of the state and anything that works towards that goal, no matter who it comes from, is considered by anarchists to be anarchist(ic). By this definition they would be tankies too.
In other words, you do not know what “tankie” means. You’re just an anti-communist too cowardly to say so.
Let’s not pretend that your politics aren’t inherently authoritarian as well.
Either you support capitalism (or worse), which is grossly authoritarian as it inflicts massive violence not only via warfare but through mass starvation and deprivation, or you support socialism, in which case you have two options:
-
The violent overthrow of the current system (spoiler alert: that’s a very authoritarian thing to do!)
-
The gradual reform of the current system, meaning maintaining the status quo for an exceptionally long time as we ever so slowly creep our way to a more just economic system while countless people starve, go homeless, die without healthcare, end up in yet-another war and so on (which is a very authoritarian proposition, just throwing away the lives of the poor in your own country—not to mention those in the developing world—just so you can have a neat and tidy reformist approach that doesn’t rock the boat.)
Libertarians are anti-war. Capitalism is not colonialism.
Do you mean libertarians, or “libertarians” as per Murray Rothbard’s quote:
“One gratifying aspect of our rise to some prominence is that, for the first time in my memory, we, ‘our side,’ had captured a crucial word from the enemy . . . ‘Libertarians’ . . . had long been simply a polite word for left-wing anarchists, that is for anti-private property anarchists, either of the communist or syndicalist variety. But now we had taken it over…”
-
They agree with fascists on every valuable part of their worldview
The Liberal says as they side with Fascists against Communists every single time
You played their own card, lmaooo
Oh yes, wanting to raise people out of poverty is totally what fascists want.
You don’t know what you are talking about. You are just repeating something someone in authority once told you to believe. Ironic.
deleted by creator
Where did you learn that? The school of enlightened centrism? How do you explain the Nazis putting every communist they could find in a concentration camp? They just violently disagreed on the wording of the exact same position?
deleted by creator
The "Holo"domor is a fascist myth. Hence why most countries do not recognize it. The Aral sea destruction happened mostly after the end of the USSR…
Meanwhile fascists did the Holocaust, which did happen and the genocidal roadshow that was WW2 followed by the genocidal roadshow that is the USA.
We need a way to differentiate between communists and the tankie subset.
No that won’t happen. This is a tactic by whatever group that is so butthurt about having left wing views on the internet to try to tone-control Lemmy. If they can get everyone to agree the slur tankie is bad, they can claim anyone that supports a left wing government that imposes a policy that restricts US freedom to exploit that country is a Tankie.
We need to stop differentiating between liberal and fascist tendendcies. Anyone who aligns with NATO ideals is a fascist, period, regardless of what label you claim.
Spoiler alert: “Tankie” is just a buzzword like the conservative interpretation of “woke”
Ah the classic “No True Tankie” fallacy
Ah the classic pretending to invoke fallacies instead of just telling me what a “tankie” is supposed to be…
If you really just mean “commie,” just say it
He is right though. It isn’t a fallacy, the usage of the word tankie is so far removed from content that it is a bad term and more thought terminating than anything.
Tankies were originally a small subset of some Western and some, mostly East European, socialists and communists which were in favour of a (para-)military response to the revolt in Hungary in 1956. It was a complex situation and even people not on the side of Nagy within Hungary were in favour of the Soviet action.
The term now was used, and amplified by intelligence agencies and Western media, to decry the Soviet action and more importantly de-legitimize several communist groups. In that sense the functional usage of the term is similar, but the question is where would the slur hit actually?
In principle it would hit a small sub section of MLs who followed Khrushchev’s decision. Many people within the pact did see the de-Stalinisation and how it was communicated as problematic, as it enabled opposition forces to claim ground in countries. Nagy tried to do introduce reforms, the most far reaching: “Hungary to leave the Warsaw Pact and declare neutrality in the Cold War.”
Countries thinking about leaving the dominant two powers spheres of influence during the Cold War were often met with violence. See the Jakarta Method for more information about that (i.e. Vietnam, Korea, Indonesia, the whole of South America). During that time colonialism was also still relevant and colonial powers did use excessive violence, this is another part of the book.
Now what you and others do is labeling people who are to the left of the Soviets at that point as Tankies. Which is doubly wrong and cynical. What is interesting is that the slur can be traced back for the last 6 years to the US and there to more right wing places. It wasn’t primarily a phrase that was used by leftists. However after the heating chamber of the alt right online people used it to label even people who are democratic socialists at best.
In that sense it is a continuity to the Red Scare, to not have to engage with content.
Luckily the US would never in the 1950s use regime change in countries, for example it would never use military force in Guatemala to ensure the profits of the United Fruit company and the CIA director’s family or
alike
1948–1960s Italy 1949 Syrian coup d'état 1949–1953 Albania 1953 Iranian coup d'état 1954 Guatemalan coup d'état 1956–57 Syria crisis 1957–58 Indonesian rebellion 1959–2000 assassination attempts on Fidel Castro 1959 Cambodia, Bangkok Plot 1960 Congo coup d'état 1961 Cuba, Bay of Pigs Invasion 1961 Cuba, Operation Mongoose 1961 Dominican Republic 1963 South Vietnamese coup d'état 1964 Brazilian coup d'état 1965–66 Indonesia, Transition to the New Order 1966 Ghanaian coup d'état 1971 Bolivian coup d'état 1970–1973 Chile 1976 Argentine coup d'état 1979 Salvadoran coup d'état 1979–1989 Afghanistan, Operation Cyclone 1975–1992 Angola, UNITA 1981–1990 Nicaragua, Contras 1982 Chad 1996 Iraq coup attemptBullshit. Everyone’s a tankie. My dog is a tankie. Tankie doesn’t mean shit, in the four years it’s been revived, nobody has ever been able to give me a universal definition. It literally just means “people I don’t like”.
I’ve seen anarchists get called tankies. I myself am a Marxist-Leninist but because I may be better at conveying my thoughts and opinions I don’t get called a tankie, while other MLs do. I literally have the same opinions they do, but anarchists sometimes think I’m cool with them lol.
Tankie doesn’t mean anything. You’re a tankie.
tl:dr “Tankie” means someone who’s more interested in following a communist team rather then a communist ideal. Even if the team leader is just a grifter.
If you acknowledge the short comings of certain states that don’t really follow the “from each according to his ability to each according to his need”, you’re not a tankie.
That’s a pretty vague definition you came up for to dismiss people.
By your definition, every community is a tankie because every communist rejects idealism. If these are the only two options, the only option left is to choose a team. But that can’t be right because you imply that some communists aren’t tankies.
Further, does it count as a definition if other people use the term in different ways?
If so, how do you know who is a communist and who is a tankie without asking them how they decided to show (critical) support for XYZ?
By your definition, you must first know whether someone has strong reasons to support XYZ before being able to decide that they really decided because XYZ was on the right team. That would be exhausting and fraught with the problem that nobody is going to say they didn’t do the reading; if they give an argument, how do you determine whether it’s valid or a cover for ‘choosing by reference to team’?
I’m unsure if it’s possible to define ‘tankie’ by reference to ‘communist’ without also defining the latter and showing how they’re different.
ah, you think I don’t have definitions of those words?
“Woke” as we’re using it today start around the 1920’s America and the was by the black community to refer to white people who were aware of and sympathetic to social injustices committed against the black community. It’s sense evolved to include anyone belong to a majority group aware of and sympathetic to an oppressed group.
“Tankie” refers to people who profess their love of communism, but pick allies not on action, but on team affiliation. Any short coming of their favorite communist™ state isn’t an internal fault, but something the evil “west” has committed against them. Which, to be fair, the CIA loves fucking around in South America,
The tankie isn’t at all much different from the “patriotic” Maga head. A Maga head will scream about how free America is, but defending it whenever the county, or more specifically, their team, starts restricting personal freedoms of lgbt individuals, minority rights, or women’s and particularly women’s reproductive rights.
Both tankies and Maga heads will preform mental gymnastics to try and rationalize why the gays can’t be married even though the text of either group doesn’t have any problem with them.
I don’t have any problem with textbook Communist. So long as they can acknowledge the short comings of how it’s been applied so far and how it’s been subverted by people who want to consolidate power and wealth. Same logic goes for Capitalists. In principle, both systems are viable economic models, although textbook communism is the more progressive one. But both, at least as applied by real and would be super powers, are corrupt and dangerous.
Any short coming of their favorite communist™ state isn’t an internal fault, but something the evil “west” has committed against them.
To be fair, as you said, many of these problems are because of the International Community™. As for the rest, maybe all support should be critical, with increasingly less “critical” the less there is to criticize.
Both tankies and Maga heads will preform mental gymnastics to try and rationalize why the gays can’t be married
I haven’t seen anyone on Lemmygrad express that view, and I certainly support our LGBT comrades.
I haven’t seen anyone on Lemmygrad express that view, and I certainly support our LGBT comrades.
I’ve seen it else were. Gonzalo Lira might be a special case though. I mean you have to be a special kind of stupid to spread Russian propaganda while in Ukraine. He’s also complained that women don’t dress up anymore while looking like hobo for his online “debates”.
Point being is that it’s well known that Russian and China aren’t lgbt friendly and supporters of those countries either need to be ok with that or intentionally ignorant of that. I have seen some snide comments on other communist forums towards lgbt people. The rational, if there is any, is that childless people don’t belong in a long term society.
Well, perhaps you’d be relieved to know that on Lemmygrad, we condemned the Russian Federation for its recent anti-LGBT policies then.
Tell me, what should a communist do if they’re a citizen of the U.S. and the US were to make voting mandatory, punishable by death? Should we die rather than vote for someone we disagree with, or should we pick someone we think might be marginally better?
That’s how we feel about Russia — we don’t pretend to think they’re communist, and there are things we disagree with, but they’re still better than the US, so we vote for them.
A tankie is someone who supports the Soviets sending tanks to stop the Hungarian revolution and other other use is made-up bullshit.
Words and their usage evolve over time. That’s the origin of the word.
Yes it’s calling them tankies. They currently seem to be keen on framing it as “buzzword” or “undefined culture war slur against the whole left”, while in more or less the same breath of course still stanning for North Korea and calling China communist and ignoring that they’re called out by the collective rest of the left for that. With that exact term.
In case you have too much time have Keffals on Hakim on the world tankie.
Which is on brand for them. The original “tankies” were cheering on the Soviets violently crushing uprisings by other communists for attempting to practice the “wrong kind” of communism, AKA “Anything other than complete submission to Soviet oppression.”
That’s the sole identifying mark of a tankie: a desire to crush dissidence of their peers through violence, particularly if their victims share their professed economic ideology. Tankies aren’t communists: they’re fascists cosplaying as communists.
Tankies are a COINTELPRO plot to discredit the left, convince me otherwise.
Can you send me your list of nice, approved communists plz? Would be much appreciated. lol
Well I’m not a communist so I’m kinda the wrong guy to ask but you’d be surprised, Lenin is on that list for me. You know the guy who warned everyone that Stalin must under no circumstance be allowed to lead. A lot of good analysis, alas his solutions often had first solution syndrome, meaning they were insufficiently hardened against good ole power dynamics taking over because, as Marx so rightly observed, it’s in a class’ interest to act in its own self-interest and ultimately the nomenklatura is a class as distinct from the proletariat, or even party base, as priests are from believers. I’m pretty sure if the guy had Lenin’s failures to look back at he’d do a lot better, though.
If you want something random to read to learn from I’d recommend the Anarchist Library. And Bookchin in particular.
What’s wrong with you calling ancaps fascist? I mean, they are not more or less fascist than anyone in this pic except for the tankie getting pummeled, and the tankie always has this coming.
Reminds one of Twitter or Reddit.
![The Whole Fediverse is Wholesome [fixed]](https://media.kbin.social/media/75/34/7534fdd6766a8bc7f83436386577e62a42333384f5e0e25621c1ee00ac70f675.jpg){kind=link}
