Modlog: https://sh.itjust.works/modlog/25693?page=1&actionType=All&userId=21053985 , banned by @goat@sh.itjust.works
For context, goat started calling dbzer0 users tankies, and got into a few arguments.
More context:
It started (to my knowledge) with this comment, goat pinged db0 after he downvoted a comment
a note on the uyghurs (click to show
For the record, I believe that the Uyghurs are mistreated by the CCP, and are experiencing cultural erasure and Human Rights abuses, but there's a lack of evidence that it's a genocide specifically (especially since it seems to target the religion, rather than the ethnic group).
Goat banned IndustryStandard, leading to this thread: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/52160152/ leading to goat commenting this:
https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/52160152/21070262
He mentions this:
We constantly encounter bots, spammers, alt accounts, trolls, and doxxers, so I need to be vigilant by regularly checking who’s interfering and from where.
Which I find ironic, since there was some vote manipulation happening, which goat did nothing about (and could be behind), but I'll get to that later.
After some more arguments, goat started calling dbzer0 users tankies, saying that letting tankie users engage on dbzer0 comms means other users are tankies:
He said that it's different for LW (lemmy.world) and SJW (sh.itjust.works, not the other word). He then poster the "Tank Man" picture to !flippanarchy@lemmy.dbzer0.com, as he expected us to retaliate (being tankies, according to him). We did not, in fact, retaliate: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/21089819
He also posted this in tankiejerk: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/52268655, https://sh.itjust.works/comment/20733015.
He also may have done vote manipulation, and at the very least allowed it.
Take, for example, this comment: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/21091723
Per lemvotes, it was downvoted by the following users:
The relevant ones here are:
- zedbite@lemmy.world,
- Alpacaaca@lemmy.cafe,
- chirichiri@sh.itjust.works.
If you look through other comments, they downvoted me and other users near-systemically, while upvoting comments made by goat.
For example, take a look at their (respective) lemvotes profile pages: https://lemvotes.org/user/zedbite@lemmy.world https://lemvotes.org/user/Alpacaaca@lemmy.cafe https://lemvotes.org/user/chirichiri@sh.itjust.works
They have all downvoted exclusively arguments against goat and others, and were made almost at the same time.
After a bit more arguing (I'm not posting the specific comments because it's tedious, and they're easy to see by scrolling through goat's profile.) goat decided to ban all dbzer0 users from meanwhileongrad, I think this comment marks when he decided to do this, but I may be wrong.
note on the post that comment was in reply to
I think this reply (by unruffled) was taken out of context. Unruffled is absolutely not defending what's happening to the Uyghurs, they're saying that a lot of people have a double standard, where they will not hesitate to condemn the Uyghur genocide, but hesitate on the gaza one, especially when the gaza one is more severe and urgent. To quote them directly:
Yes, that's exactly what I was saying but of course they misrepresented it. You know exactly what Americans are like. They couldn't give a shit about the uyghurs, except as a way to China bash and feel superior. I also explicitly said later in the comments I agreed it was a genocide. They're just doin' the usual bad faith takes.
Feel free to quote me lol
Since this goat had been banned from dbzer0 for being hostile:
https://sh.itjust.works/modlog?page=1&actionType=All&userId=63615
huh, turns out having a vague, poorly defined label anyone could use to deride and write someone off as a pinko commie at a moment's notice was a bad idea, who could've possibly seen this coming
Look we cannot listen to the people we call tankies, WE would never be called a tankie we are just left wing
The words tankie and fascist are very similar, in the sense that they have a precise definition, yet people who fit that definition constantly claim that it's vague and poorly defined.
They are also very similar in the sense that tankies are fascists.
Tankie is a pejorative, it isn't an ideology, and as such it is levied against the same people "commie, pinko, and red" are. It's a pejorative for Marxists, and/or those who support existing or formerly existing socialist states.
Fascism, on the other hand, is an ideology. It isn't a pejorative, it's what arises when capitalism is in crisis and the bourgeoisie needs to violently assert itself to maintain power, often with the support of the petite-bourgeoisie. The "vagueness" surrounding fascism is that it's inherently irrational and contradictory, as it's something that arises when capitalism's contradictions are at their sharpest.
No, Marxists are not fascists. Marxism supports the proletariat using state force against the bourgeoisie, fascists support the bourgeoisie using state force against the proletariat. This is like saying Israel and Palestine are the same thing, or capitalists and workers. Read Blackshirts and Reds.
Tankie does have a specific meaning though. Authoritarian communists. It was a term used to describe communists in western countries who supported the human rights abuses of the Soviet Union. Specifically when the Soviet army invaded Hungary to suppress the 1956 democratic revolution.
It's not a specific pejorative against all communists. I don't think the type of people who say "commie, pinko or red" actually use it at all.
The usage of "tankie" we see here in Lemmy (especially of late and from certain well known posters who tend to go around blaming American lefties for "electing Trump" by "not voting Democrat") does not have that subtlety.
Similarly to what happenned with the term "terrorist", "tankie" has been appropriated and is being used by people with certain specific political beliefs (mainly tribalist supporters of the US Democrat Party mainstream and similar - so basically hard neoliberals) as a form of slander against people with beliefs to the left of theirs, quite independently of them actually being Authoritarian, and the targets thus tend to be in a huge range of political beliefs since the people using "tankie" like that tend to be quite close to Fascism (but not quite) in almost every social domain but Morality.
Granted, this misuse of "tankie" is far more recent than the misuse of "terrorist" and has so far nowhere as bad real life impact as the other one (the Brits aren't yet arresting old ladies for belonging to an anti-Genocide group that the Home Office has deemed "tankie"), though it's good to keep in mind MacCarthism and the Red Scare and the current geostrategical situation were China seems to be growing to take the top place from the US and the Political and Propaganda discourse around China in certain countries is becoming more like Faith and treated as beyond question in any way form or shape, so who knows what this shit will evolve into.
First of all, all ideologies are "authoritarian," including anarchism. The most practical definition of the term is the use of force, or authority, against another group. In all existing states, that either means the bourgeoisie oppresses the proletariat, or the proletariat oppresses the bourgeoisie. Anarchists also advocate force against the bourgeoisie. The only way out of "authoritarianism" is to remove class, which in the eyes of Marxists can only happen upon full collectivization of production.
As for Hungary in 1956, I'm not sure you want to back an anti-semitic, western-trained and supplied color revolution where Nazis were let out of jail and sicced on communists and Jewish peoples. They were marking their doors and lynching people. Framing that as a "democratic" revolution just full on accepts the western-reported events, even while they hid MI-6's involvement, as well as that of the CIA, and minimized the pograms and lynchings.
"Tankie" is just a pejorative, one that lacks substance beyond caricature.
Oh so you are actually a tankie by definition haha. Ok I guess this post makes more sense now.
I think it's fair for me to assume that you're just going to call me a brainwashed liberal for not agreeing with your narrative on the revolution. So, respectfully, discussing that probably isn't going to be very productive for us.
But I do think you are misrepresenting the idea of authoritarianism. You are correct that at some level authority is applied in every society, but where that authority is derived from is the distinguishing characteristic.
In a democratic system, authority is derived from the will of the people through elections and voting. Unions, the original soviets and many communist structures are inherently democratic. However In a traditionally "authoritarian" system, authority is usually derived from the threat of violence.
While the threat of violence exists in a democratic system, there is a path to peaceful reform and resolution of conflict. In an authoritarian system, change is usually only achieved through violence.
You may or may not be a liberal, that doesn't really make a difference, you're already caricaturizing me rather than engaging with the points I actually make. That's the point of "tankie," it gives you a ready-made strawman to justify not engaging with the actual points at hand.
"Brainwashing" doesn't exist, though, people ultimately license themselves to believe whatever they presently believe materially benefits them and morally justifies them. I'm not "enlightened" nor am I immune to propaganda, but I have done a lot of research into the common "black marks" of AES. I believe the level of research I've done is sufficient to reject the standard western claims on a lot of red scare-era myths.
As for the origin of authority, the USSR was democratic. It was dissolved entirely through reform! The fact that it oppressed the bourgeousie, the White Army, terrorists, Nazi sympathizers, etc isn't in conflict with the fact that it was overall a collectively run society with a unique and far-more integrated form of democracy that goes well beyond liberal democracy.
Sure, I'm a Marxist-Leninist, if you're anti-Marxist I would be a "tankie, commie, pinko, red," etc in your eyes. I'd rather you move beyond simple pejoratives and actually engage with the facts at hand, though.
I think we'll have to disagree to disagree. (Except for the parts where I completely agree with you)
To bring it back to the original point:
Personally knowing Ukrainians who are currently defending their homes from Russian invasion, I think I will never forgive Russia for what they've done and the innocent people they've killed. Just like I would never forgive the US, or Israel or any country that commits similar atrocities. Putin ultimately bears responsible for this.
I appreciate the thoughtful responses you gave to everything though and it gave me reason to think through my own convictions too (even if they remain unchanged).
We weren't talking about the modern Russo-Ukrainian War, though. Ignoring that there are a ton of people in the Donbass region that will never forgive Kiev for murdering them over the last decade in a bloody civil war, we were talking about Hungary in 1956, and the USSR. Modern Russia, the Russian Federation, is capitalist, we were talking about the USSR.
Is your point just that Russians themselves are evil? Genuinely, otherwise I'm not sure why you're suddenly bringing up the RF. I feel like this is a drastic topic change that had no leadup whatsoever. We can discuss the complexities of the lead-up to the modern Russo-Ukrainian War if you want, but that's a pretty big pivot.
Oh yeah. Just completely unverifiable claims of indiscriminate shelling by Ukraine after Russia invaded Donbass and Crimea.
Also my bad, I was in another discussion and got mixed up. People tend to pile on you in .ml when you don't toe the party line.
But, I did mean what I said about the discussion.
The civil war started a decade ago, even western orgs like NPR were reporting on the tensions between the Donbass and western Ukraine. It's absolutely verified at this point that the Donbass region is pro-Russian overall, what's under consideration is whether Kiev has the right to prevent them from seceding, and whether Kiev is justified in claiming Russia wants to annex all of Ukraine, or just the Donbass region. The situation is a lot more complex than Putin waking up one day and deciding to conquer the west, and trying to reduce it to a simple battle of "good vs evil" harms our ability to understand how to get the best outcome out of our present situations.
Either way, though, thanks for at least being relatively receptive to the Marxist viewpoint, even if you're ultimately rejecting it. It's good to question your understanding, especially when it aligns with the US Empire's narrative. As the world hegemon, the US Empire is by far the biggest obstacle to global prosperity, so its motives in any situation need to be called into question. It never does anything out of a desire for altruism, nobody does.
Exactly. I'm a communist, but not a tankie, as I do not support Russia or China.
Alright, fascist
nah, tankies suck.
people want to keep pretending like it means things it doesn’t, but that doesn’t change what it means.
it’s like how governments try to call everyone terrorists… terrorism still means something… it’s blowing up random civilians for political means.
it’s still bad to be a terrorist….
'Tankie' means 'a person who is correct'.
‘tankie’ means online shill pretending to be a tankie
Haha.
In an overwhelming amount of cases, the word is used to derogatorily refer to somebody who is correct. The word is most often used when the speaker tries to lie to themselves and others that they support things like colonialism and genocides.
you are extremely incorrect, but you’re on hexbear so that’s par for the course
Notably, you have been unable to point out any evidence of me supposedly being incorrect. No precedents so far.
okay tankie
okay terrorist
It's not very effective
"Tankie" means the same thing "commie, pinko, and red" do, it's a pejorative for Marxists and/or those that support existing socialist states. That's why this thread is even a thing in the first place, the cryptofascists on MWoG are calling even dbzer0 users "tankies" for not just dogmatically accepting everything they believe about socialist states uncritically.
Tankie means that you will enforce your ideology at the barrel of a tank
You are also shilling hostile regime propaganda.
Normal commie will acknowledge abuses of commie regimes... You won't.
Not the same thing.
Same way some westoid normie still shill their own regimes in earnest.
While others see these clown regimes for what they are.
We are not the same.
"Tankie," again, is a pejorative levied against the same people "commie, pinko, and red" are. Every ideology supports using force against enemies of the ruling class, be that ruling class the bourgeoisie in liberalism and fascism, or the proletariat as it is in socialism. The "normal" communists you refer to, that reject using force to defend socialism, either do not exist or exist only in the west, in areas that have not seen revolution, and think it more akin to a dinner party.
I don't "shill hostile regime propaganda," whatever that means. I also do acknowledge real excess in socialist systems, for example the suppression of the LGBT community early on in Cuba, before they made huge strides in that department. What I deny is western propaganda, and I do so with sources.
Yes, you and I are not the same, I'm a communist that pays dues and actually organizes in the real world.
Now do the gulag system and holodomor
What do you mean "do the gulag system and holodomor?"
👍
Amazing, the generic anti-communism is getting lazier and lazier.
tankie calling a literal communist, anti-communism, because they speak of authoritarian faux-communists atrocities and crimes against humanity…
i will hand it to you, it’s an effective troll technique you’re doing: pretend to be an exaggerated version of the most toxic subset of a group, then try your best to ruin any earnest attempt at conversation….
oh and look, you’re on one of the tankie-triad instances… what a suprise.
sunzu2 is one of the more dogmatic anti-communists, not sure why they pass your test and I don't. I literally pay dues and organize IRL. It isn't trolling, either, I wouldn't go through the effort of putting together Marxist-Leninist introductory reading lists or going to great lengths to dispel red scare-era mythos.
There were no earnest attempts at conversation from sunzu2. You're reflexively siding with them because they fit your anti-Marxist bias (further affirmed by your "tankie-triad" jab), but if you read honestly it's immediately clear that I gave far more effort into that conversation than they did.
sure
Somehow even lazier generic anti-communism than before. Is this a contest?
——-
go ahead and pretend like you don’t understand that.
Yes.
AES states are genuinely socialist, they have economies where at minimum the large firms and key industries are publicly owned, some go beyond that. Also not sure why you're mixing in states and parties together, or why you're leaving out Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, etc.
Citation needed, otherwise this is just libel.
I'd flip it, no AES state is perfect, but have generally been more good than bad.
Citation needed.
No, this is a fundamentally flawed understanding of Marxism, socialism, and the dictatorship of the proletariat.
a. The Marxist understanding of the state is as an extension of the interests of the ruling class, not a class in and of itself. The state withers when production has been fully collectivized, as there is no class distinction. It isn't a system to collapse into horizontalism, but a gradual sublimation of property from the various relations into one fully equalized and collectivized, run along common plans.
b. Socialism is the process of collectivizing production. Between economies that are run with private ownership principle and fully collectivized, communist society, there is the stage at which there is diverse ownership but public ownership is principle, ie governs the large firms and key industries.
c. The dictatorship of the proletariat is the rule of society by the proletatiat, not over the proletariat. This means that the bourgeoisie is stripped of their political power, and democracy is extended to the working class.
I understand you, in fact you've made my point for me by so clearly illustrating that you in fact don't have any familiarity with the Marxist position. If you want a place to start, feel free to check out my Read Theory, Darn it! intro Marxist-Leninist reading list. At a bare minimum, at least make an attempt to understand the Marxist viewpoint of section 6 (the theory of the state) so you don't make the same mistake in the future.
As it stands, it is lazy, bad-faith anti-communism on your part if you aren't going to even try to understand the core difference between anarchists and Marxists. There exist better anarchist critiques of Marxists that actually understand the Marxist position, I would know as I used to be an anarchist.
Plus, you directly have posted hasbara equating Hamas to Israel, claiming Hamas slaughters Palestinians, both-sidesing a genocide. It's incredible that you claim I'm the one minimizing atrocities when you're running interference for Zionists.
Loser
nooooooo! my one weakness is you calling me a loser!
Sure
I'm ideologically anti-fascist, and I support enforcing that on the Nazis at the barrel of a tank. Guess I'm evil, only obligate pacifism is acceptable.