Western perception of “Social credit” largely propaganda btw and if you believe it isnt then you got manipulated.
this post was submitted on 29 Nov 2025
457 points (82.6% liked)
Lefty Memes
6266 readers
494 users here now
An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of the "ML" influence of instances like lemmy.ml and lemmygrad. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.
Agitprop (I.E. everything that would be more fitting on a poster than a meme) goes here.
Serious posts, news, and discussion go in c/Socialism.
If you are new to socialism, you can ask questions and find resources over on c/Socialism101.
Please don't forget to help keep this community clean by reporting rule violations, updooting good contributions and downdooting those of low-quality!
Rules
0. Only post socialist memes
That refers to funny image macros and means that generally videos and screenshots are not allowed. Exceptions include explicitly humorous and short videos, as well as (social media) screenshots depicting a funny situation, joke, or joke picture relating to socialist movements, theory, societal issues, or political opponents. Examples would be the classic case of humorous Tumblr or Twitter posts/threads. (and no, agitprop text does not count as a meme. Please post agitprop here)
0.5 [Provisional Rule] Use alt text or image descriptions to allow greater accessibility
(Please take a look at our wiki page for the guidelines on how to actually write alternative text!)
We require alternative text (from now referred to as "alt text") to be added to all posts/comments containing media, such as images, animated GIFs, videos, audio files, and custom emojis.
EDIT: For files you share in the comments, a simple summary should be enough if they’re too complex.
We are committed to social equity and to reducing barriers of entry, including (digital) communication and culture. It takes each of us only a few moments to make a whole world of content (more) accessible to a bunch of folks.
When alt text is absent, a reminder will be issued. If you don't add the missing alt text within 48 hours, the post will be removed. No hard feelings.
0.5.1 Style tip about abbreviations and short forms
When writing stuff like "lol" and "iirc", it's a good idea to try and replace those with their all caps counterpart
- ofc => OFC
- af = AF
- ok => OK
- lol => LOL
- bc => BC
- bs => BS
- iirc => IIRC
- cia => CIA
- nato => Nato (you don't spell it when talking, right?)
- usa => USA
- prc => PRC
- etc.
Why? Because otherwise (AFAIK), screen readers will try to read them out as actually words instead of spelling them
1. Socialist Unity in the form of mutual respect and good faith interactions is enforced here
Try to keep an open mind, other schools of thought may offer points of view and analyses you haven't considered yet. Also: This is not a place for the Idealism vs. Materialism or rather Anarchism vs. Marxism debate(s), for that please visit c/AnarchismVsMarxism.
2. Anti-Imperialism means recognizing capitalist states like Russia and China as such
That means condemning (their) imperialism, even if it is of the "anti-USA" flavor.
3. No liberalism, (right-wing) revisionism or reactionaries.
That includes so called: Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, Dengism, Market Socialism, Patriotic Socialism, National Bolshevism, Anarcho-Capitalism etc. . Anti-Socialist people and content have no place here, as well as the variety of "Marxist"-"Leninists" seen on lemmygrad and more specifically GenZedong (actual ML's are welcome as long as they agree to the rules and don't just copy paste/larp about stuff from a hundred years ago).
4. No Bigotry.
The only dangerous minority is the rich.
5. Don't demonize previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.
We must constructively learn from their mistakes, while acknowledging their achievements and recognizing when they have strayed away from socialist principles.
(if you are reading the rules to apply for modding this community, mention "Mantic Minotaur" when answering question 2)
6. Don't irrationally idolize/glorify previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.
Notable achievements in all spheres of society were made by various socialist/people's/democratic republics around the world. Mistakes, however, were made as well: bureaucratic castes of parasitic elites - as well as reactionary cults of personality - were established, many things were mismanaged and prejudice and bigotry sometimes replaced internationalism and progressiveness.
- Absolutely no posts or comments meant to relativize(/apologize for), advocate, promote or defend:
- Racism
- Sexism
- Queerphobia
- Ableism
- Classism
- Rape or assault
- Genocide/ethnic cleansing or (mass) deportations
- Fascism
- (National) chauvinism
- Orientalism
- Colonialism or Imperialism (and their neo- counterparts)
- Zionism
- Religious fundamentalism of any kind
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
Keep in mind, nobody has been able to cite a single comment of mine that has “deified” anything. I have never praised Stalin (go check my comment history), however I have merely pointed out the success of the USSR. Big fucking deal lol.
Honesty hilarious and ironic to see this level of panic and censorship over a mere difference of opinion, while crying about the authoritarianism of China and Stalin.
Pretty embarrassing for you guys.
I'm calling your bluff
You heard it folks. Saying that Stalin was a communist is now “praise”. Great work fella 🤣
Totally not praise. /s
Acknowledging the success of the USSR is now praising Stalin. It keeps getting dumber and dumber 🤣
You can just admit it, comrade. You're not fooling anyone that you don't admire Stalin.
Wait, admiring is deifying? Someone needs to update the rules. Sounds a lot more like you're attempting to weaponize the rules to create a thought police regime so you don't have to deal with your own cognitive dissonance.
Analyzing the successes and failures of the Soviet project is not deifying. Admiring specific leaders for specific accomplishments is not deifying.
Who said "deifying"?
I'm sorry, but what the fuck are you talking about?
Rule 6 says "idealizing/glorifying". A poster in this thread. Dogbert said the word "deifying" in this thread. Maybe you don't think those are interchangeable. I could be convinced either way.
As for what I am talking about, the fact that Dogbert praises Stalin is apparently a problem for you. It is possible to praise people for the positive things they have done. Some people argue against that praise because they think the negative things the person has done are more important. Some people go so far as to believe it's not possible a person has done anything praise worthy ever because of the bad things they have done and that therefore anyone praising them is clearly morally derelict and that their opinions no longer matter.
The fact that you are trying to paint Dogbert's praising of Stalin as something he should "admit" is a way of drawing a boundary between acceptable and unacceptable beliefs, a form of thought policing, and also a way to create an echo chamber where you can't be confronted with positions that challenge your own position and threaten some of the beliefs that you hold tied into your identity.
So what I am talking about is you, choosing to interpret Rule 6 as applying to a positive analysis of Stalin's actions in office because you can't really handle discourse that runs counter to an orthodoxy that you adhere to.
That's true. Those terms are not interchangeable.
They're denying that they praise Stalin. That's the problem.
That wall of text is a propos of... what exactly?
No. I said that they should "admit" it, because they claim that they don't idealize Stalin, which is ridiculous if you read their comments.
Projection much?
Never applied to no rule. You're fighting strawmen.
Ok, idolize/glorify is different than praise. Go ahead and argue that point. I am interested in understanding the position.
They said they didn't praise Stalin, you said that saying good things about Stalin is praising him. He disagrees with your definition. I don't. I think you're right. That's praising Stalin. But I don't see anything wrong with praising people for the good things that they did.
Further you didn't say they should admit that they idealize Stalin, you said they should admit that they praise Stalin. There's definitely a difference in those two words. You're moving the goal posts again.
You think I am projecting that I have a problem with cognitive disaonance based on what evidence? I am not trying to get you cross some moral line like "admit to everyone here you're just a dirty liberal who thinks Obama was a good guy". I am engaging you and critiquing you. If you can't tell the difference, I can't help you yet.
And if you can read the thread, the thread you are replying to invokes Rule 6 which is what caused the commenter you are debating against to start this conversation about praise/deification/etc
Read
Please google the difference yourself. I can't be bothered to play your dictionary.
Then why are you bothering me?
Do you see anything wrong with people being dishonest, then?
I said "admire". At least quote me correctly.
No, for that, the difference would need to matter. I ain't moving shit. They were being dishonest and I called them out for it. I never judged them for wanting to french kiss Stalin. /hj
You keep using that word
You failed to grasp the point I was trying to make, cramming yourself into a conversation you weren't a part of, pedantically focusing on semantic trivialities, obviously trying to peddle some tankie narrative or whitewash some other tankie's attempts at trolling. That's not "engaging and critiquing". It's harrassment, or at least bothering.
I'm fine without your "help". Thanks but no thanks.
If you read the thread, you will find out that my insertion to it was purely based on calling out that person's bluff. I didn't judge anyone's actual opinion on Stalin.
No, u