this post was submitted on 06 Feb 2025
795 points (82.6% liked)
memes
11606 readers
1672 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I have to ask, are shitlibs aware that Wikipedia isn't divine gospel, and that there are other works in the history of humanity? Because it seems to inevitably be their one and only go to, which is particularly embarrassing given that even a middle school teacher could tell you that it's not a good source. Even worse, it doesn't' even back up your claim!
Yes it does. Wikipedia is a fairly neutral source. Middle school teachers will tell you that tertiary sources are a good way to start your research when you apparently have no idea what you're talking about.
https://www.dictionary.com/e/politics/tankie/
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=tankie
I mean, it's basically your bible, your one and only source for everything. Of course you think it's neutral. It's not, by the way, but you think it is.
That makes sense then, as it's obvious that neoliberals who only cite Wikipedia have no idea what they're talking about.
Oh wow, really digging deep for sources now.
Though even these sources basically confirm that it's a vaguely defended snarl word that can be leveled at anyone to the left of Bernie Sanders.
I get more and more liberal every time I see some self-described leftist call people a shitlib because they’re slightly right of Pol Pit or whatever.
Pol Pot defenders pretty much only exist on Reddit, Gonzaloism is near universally hated by all of Lemmy's Marxist-aligned instances.
Oh are we doing the no true Pol Pot supporter thing now?
Genuinely don't understand what you mean. Go to Hexbear, grad, .ml, whatever, and ask everyone's opinions on Pol Pot. It's 99% going to be negative, perhaps with some minor nuance considering the utter mess that was the Sino-Soviet Split and the US's CIA partnership with Pol Pot. Reddit, however, does have quite a few Gonzaloists on r/communism now, and Gonzaloists generally defend Pol Pot as well.
What nuance could there possibly be about Pol Pot?
Less about Pol Pot, more about the utter fucking mess that was the Sino-Soviet Split and how that impacted Cambodia. This isn't Pol Pot apologia, but an acknowledgement of the entire situation being fucked. Blowback season 5 covers Cambodia, so I can't wait to get there.
I can’t even find hexbear or grad.
Because you're on Lemmy.world, which defederated from them due to not wanting to interact with Marxists.
Personally I’m a big fan of McCartneyism-Lennonism.
I’ve been thinking of making an alt at ml for that reason.
If you want access to Grad or Hex, that works.
Well that's a pretty stupid reason to change your political beliefs.
I’m not changing it just reinforcing it.