this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2023
514 points (86.6% liked)

Tankiejerk

622 readers
3 users here now

Dunking on Tankies from a leftist perspective.

A tankie is someone who defends/supports authoritarian or even totalitarian regimes who call themselves "socialist". The term originated from people supporting the 1956 invasion of Hungary by the Soviet Union. Nowadays they are just terminally online, denying genocides, and falling for totalitarian propaganda and calling such regimes "true democracies". remember to censor usernames when necessary.

Please be sure to obscure usernames on posts to prevent doxxing.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Image Transcription:

An 8-panel Phoebe Teaching Joey meme.

The first panel is Phoebe from Friends saying "Russia".

The second panel is Joey from the same show replying with "Russia".

The third panel is Phoebe saying "has invaded".

The fourth panel is Joey repeating back "has invaded".

The fifth panel is Phoebe saying "Ukraine".

The sixth panel is Joey repeating back "Ukraine".

The seventh panel is Phoebe saying the completed phrase "Russia has invaded Ukraine".

The final panel shows Joey proudly proclaiming "NATO just started a proxy war".

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It isn't a democracy if you pick a class of people (e.g., property owners) to disenfranchise, and make the argument that an open democracy favors the wealthy and therefore you won't have one.

You gotta use the actual examples of the folks applying the term to evaluate what it means.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

By your weird logic, taxes on the wealthy aren't democratic, even when the majority votes for them.

True communism is merely that, extreme taxes on the wealthy until there are no individual factory owners, just communal owners. As for land, nothing in communist ideology says that you cannot own your own home, just the opposite. What you cannot do, is own all the homes in a neighborhood and charge ruinous rents.

Communism is about ridding society of the parasite class, those rich bastards who abuse their wealth to exploit others, often causing real harm.

Society creates laws to prevent one person from harming another. We just need to acknowledge the very real harms that the rich inflict on people every day.

Hell, wage theft is the number one type of theft in the US, with dollar amounts greater than all other types of theft combined.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

By your weird logic, taxes on the wealthy aren't democratic, even when the majority votes for them

Of course they are; abolishing the vote because the majority doesn't vote the way you want, however, isn't democracy.

True communism is merely that, extreme taxes on the wealthy until there are no individual factory owners, just communal owners

So all the communist governments of the 20th century weren't "true" communists; it's a bit no true scotsman, don't you think?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Going back to my original comment, no they weren't. They were dictatorships, and dictatorships can't be communist, no matter what the propaganda they put out. A dictatorship is closer to feudalism than communism. The King owning everything, even your house is no different from "the State" owning everything, even your house, because at the heart of it, the dictator is the state.

True communism might have a government, but it will be made up of the people, and it will serve the people. People would own their own homes, and collectively own their workplaces. It would be like putting the union in charge of the work site.

That's the dream, but the dream is often betrayed. A dream betrayed is a nightmare.


Also, the rich assholes are actively trying to abolish the vote because the majority support taxing their asses. Because in a capitalist society, the rich hate the poor, and work to prevent the poor from having a voice.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

My point (and I can't stress this enough) is that a political philosophy that relies on dismantling democratic processes and disenfranchising a large portion of the electorate to function is not democratic, even in theory.

Marx's conception of the dictatorship of the proletariat may not have been authoritarian, but Lenin's was; I understand what you are saying (essentially that communism must be democratic, and that therefore anything that calls itself communism that is not democratic must in fact not be democratic).

At the same time, communist theorists have made up marvelously positive-sounding terms that boil down to "dictatorship is good if it's the right dictator", and that's what tankies (the people OP was referring to) use to justify supporting authoritarianism.

If you'd like to define "true communism" as excluding all actual communist regimes, do you -- I'm not trying to argue over whether communism is good or bad in theory.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A few points;

A; The rich are not a "large portion of the electorate" They are a tiny minority with extremely outsized influence.

B; Lenin betrayed the revolution. He established a dictatorship, which is feudalism with a coat of paint. And yeah, tankies idolize that shit. They see the rich (or the merely educated) as an enemy to be hurt, and once the rich are gone, they turn on other enemies of the State. Tankies are much closer to Fascism than Communism.

Their king doles out wealth to the loyal, and uses the power of the State to hurt their enemies, enemies who Dear Leader tells them to hate.

A sort of Feudalist Fascism, it's a step back from even capitalism, which Marx saw as a necessary step between feudalism and communism.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

It's clear you feel very passionately about this, I'm certainly willing to concede that it's theoretically possible for an entirely democratic country to choose a genuinely communist model in an entirely democratic way.