this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2025
84 points (86.2% liked)
Memes
46247 readers
2241 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
THIS is why people have a problem with "tankies."
Budapest, 1956.
My family comes from Iran and Iraq
THIS is why I have a problem with "liberals"
Baghdad, 2003
Yea, neoliberal ideology is fucked all around. I prefer progressives over self declared libs.
Neoliberals are right wingers
Yes. And there's no actual left in the US. And it's dwindling everywhere else too. Scary times.
I've been doing antiwar protests since Iraq- absolutely massive and totally ignored by the government. It was a bit radicalizing.
I've always considered myself an anarchist. These days I get called a tankie just for being opposed to wars and vocally opposing my own governments complicity in genocide. Somehow the meaning of tankie got flipped to mean the people opposed to sending in the tanks. Most ml's I've known are the first people to shit on Khrushchev anyways.
Do you support Chinese or Russian imperialism? Do you think Uyghurs are being peacefully integrated into society? Do you think the Ukranian president is a Nazi? Was Assad forcefully ousted by Western powers for merely doing what is best for Syria? Does China have a right to control Taiwan and all territorial waters around Taiwan? Is North Korea the greatest and most transparent democracy?
The US is currently complicit in a genocide that BiBi and Trump are looking to expand it, Australia is expanding and encouraging a genocide in Papua New Guinea for mineral rights on the islands. Germany is flirting with literal Nazis because of energy prices. The Entire West is overlooking slavery on Saudi Arabia for cheap oil.
If you make apologies for "Communist" imperialism and only decry Western imperialiasm you might be a tankie. That's the general definition as I understand it. I'm happy to be corrected and learn more.
There is none. We used to think that US Canada relationship was mutual out of necessity of being neighbours. US opinion mattered more, but an impression of "pluralism" was maintained, but there were no CIA NGOs in place to subjugate Canadians to US empire. It just seems natural for Canadians to support US pretenses of freedom. That Russia wishes its neighbours to not be subverted to US empire in fanatical hatred towards Russia does not make it an empire. China has neighbours with same CIA antagonism. Taiwan, afaik, is still US official policy to be diplomatically reintegrated,
Resistance to US empire doesn't make you one.
Metrics for the region are very strong. In the history of counter terrorism, education and job creation seem like the most progressive solution. Those Uyghurs part of the US funded Islamist/ISIS coalition ruling Syria are making a new fuss, and US money to destabilize and demonize is always available, without reflecting reality.
100% both are US funded puppet regimes. Global warming related droughts/famine is opportunity to build anger over not feeding everyone, and only job available is a militant.
Hatred of Russia is that they are former communists. The core of Ukrainian nazi resentment, and apartheid ethnostate laws enacted to help provoke war. If the only reason for warmongering on China is their expected invasion of Taiwan, the status quo could be easily negotiated. There is zero evidence based assessment of Uyghur policy, or metrics to befriend China. Complaints about Uyghurs are exclusively made to warmonger through whinning. Obviously, abuse of Muslims is not a principled standard to avoid. Only US propaganda of hatred applies, and you must believe all of it, or you are a tankie.
Two things can't be bad at the same time, I guess.
Ah yes, the famous liberal, George Bush.
You do know that the wars spanned multiple administrations including democratic ones right? Also all American politicians of "both" parties are liberals.
Bill Clinton launched "Operation Desert Fox" to prepare and position the US imperial army ahead of "Operation Iraqi Freedom"
That is all accurate and I don't disagree with you. But the picture was of an invasion under Bush, not Clinton, so I responded as such.
The problem that I take is l:
I'm wondering what your definition of Liberal is. Up until like 2020, it was Liberal v Conservative and when I look it up in the dictionary I get "Relating to or denoting a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise."
But Liberal on Lemmy appears to be anything to the right of a theoretical Star Trek post scarcity utopia.
The war in Iraq has nothing to do with the parties of the US and was an imperial war that would have occurred no matter who was the "president" of the US
Both parties in the US share an ideological commitment to capitalism and function as a uniparty to manage the empire. From the ~~CIA~~ Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism
Liberalism is a political and moral philosophy based on the rights of the individual, liberty, consent of the governed, political equality, the right to private property and equality before the law.[1][2] Liberals espouse various and often mutually warring views depending on their understanding of these principles but generally support private property, market economies, individual rights (including civil rights and human rights), liberal democracy, secularism, rule of law, economic and political freedom, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom of religion.[3] Liberalism is frequently cited as the dominant ideology of modern history.[4][5]: 11
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism
This has some good aspects and is an improvement from the monarchies that came before it but he clear problems that Marx brought into question in the 19th century. As capitalists have progressed, liberalism in the US particularly has become neoliberalism which is not something communists want and is a precursor to fascism. Liberals fight socialists and communists to maintain their private property and capitalism.
If you are talking in the context as an American of that ridiculous farce of a government "liberals" means the Democratic party, to an anarchist outsider, they are all liberals. I do not believe in or support private property or market economies and think they come in direct opposition to economic and political freedom.
Noe liberal and neo con differences are how you "kiss babies"/comment on social and cultural issues, while electioneering to make the war mongering big bucks from power.
Holy shit guys he almost gets it.
You're right there dude. Micrometers from figuring it out.
When you draw the line of Liberal v Conservative so far to the right it includes George Bush, it ceases to lose all meaning.
Liberalism is the ideological component of Capitalism. Conservativism is a type of Liberalism.
Liberals were so proud to have Dick Cheney's endorsement last election. And they were big mad that GWB didn't endorse.
Were you aware that Russia agreed to USSR's/CIS liberation? All of it was peaceful.
Whatever you do, don't look up the numbers of Soviet officials lynched before the tanks were sent in, or who the counter-revolutionaries set free from prison to help with the lynching and rioting (spoiler: literal Nazis).
Hey dont forget who funded and equipped the counter-revolutionaires (The CIA)
Beautiful ✨🥲
Marxist Leninists are defined primarily by two principles:
It means that the Soviet Union was chiefly responsible for ending the Holocaust and supporting liberation struggles around the world. It means Cuba was able to transform itself from a strip-farmed slave and prostitution hell into a Democratic republic governed meaningfully by the Cuban people with dignity and education for all. All across east Asia it's secured home rule and governments who meaningfully care and are comprised by regular working and peasant peoples. Marxism Leninism is the historical force which has been shown to be most able to grapple with the complex realities of our world dominated by white supremacy and capitalism, and fought back.
It's the reason that the supposed atrocities commuted by socialist countries are minor compared to the grand historic crimes of empires like France, Britain, the US, Germany, Japan, etc. Mistakes are made and have been made by socialist countries, sure, of course; but they were the first nations to attempt to meaningfully house people for the sake of housing. They were the first projects to successfully overthrow colonialism, and to raise literacy rates to an absurd degree even higher than in the United States today. These socialist projects need to defend themselves because very few other historical forces have shown anywhere near the potential to make a better world.
So call it whatever you like, it'll never erase the monumental good it's done for the world.
THIS is why people have a problem with Anti-Communists
Statistics from 80 days into a ~460 day genocide, Gaza, 2025