196

I wish people would look into what it actually is they decry as "tankie" and what the actual issue they have with Marxism-Leninism is. Because all I've ever seen is people pointing at mistakes or excesses that have happened under Marxism-Leninism, that could have happened under any ideology. You need a cohesive army to fight and you will have inexperienced people suddenly put into positions of power, that is true for every revolution that ever happened. Someone will have to wield authority in order to plan the logistics of the war against the bourgeoisie and against foreign incursion. How you structure the economy is a different thing after that, but you're not going to win against the onslaught of the imperial army without an army that is fighting together as a, you know, single army.

I don't see how people could look at the history of countries like Cuba or Viet Nam that suffered so greatly, that were able to throw off the yoke of colonialism with a heroic sacrifice that keeps moving me to tears, that were united under Marxism-Leninism and who clearly attribute their victory to the marxist scientific approach to societal problems. Namely historical and dialectical materialism. There is no scenario under which Viet Nam wins. No scenario under which Cuba wins. But they did thanks to Marxism-Leninism and the heroism and bravery of their revolutionaries. No matter how many dead you blame Communism for, the amount of people saved will outrank it. Please watch some of Luna Oi's videos they are inspirational and gut-wrenching at the same time. Here is her view on how they defeated fascism: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANR_owxnll0 . The video where she tears into vaush is also a good watch for a lot of western leftists because you can tell it comes straight from the heart https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5XM_v-d-hc .

I'm not even saying you should be Marxist-Leninists, but purging whoever you think is being "tankie" has been time and again how movements shot themselves in the foot. Here is Michael Parenti saying it better than I ever could in "Blackshirts and Reds":

If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum.

Some leftists and others fall back on the old stereotype of power hungry Reds who pursue power for power's sake without regard for actual social goals. If true, one wonders why, in country after country, these Reds side with the poor and powerless often at great risk and sacrifice to themselves, rather than reaping the rewards that come with serving the well-placed.

Purging the Left of communists became a longstanding practice, having injurious effects on various progressive causes. For instance, in 1949 some twelve unions were ousted from the CIO because they had Reds in their leadership. The purge reduced CIO membership by some 1.7 million and seriously weakened its recruitment drives and political clout. In the late 1940s, to avoid being "smeared" as Reds, Americans for Democratic Action (ADA), a supposedly progressive group, became one of the most vocally anticommunist organizations.

The strategy did not work. ADA and others on the Left were still attacked for being communist or soft on communism by those on the Right. Then and now, many on the Left have failed to realize that those who fight for social change on behalf of the less-privileged elements of society will be Red-baited by conservative elites whether they are communists or not. For ruling interests, it makes little difference whether their wealth and power is challenged by "communist subversives" or "loyal American liberals." All are lumped together as more or less equally abhorrent.

"Tankies" are your canary in the coal mine, when Niemöller starts his famous poem "When they came for the communists, I kept quiet: I wasn't a communist" He is talking about the KPD. Allies of the bolsheviks. What the nazis feared the most were what they called the "Judeo-bolsheviks" and when the first Jews came in to Dachau what they saw was a fully operational camp filled with bolshevik-sympathizers.

Kittenz was not a danger to anyone or harmful in any way she simply had a different view, one that wasn't afaik even marxist-leninist!