I’ve been trying to find a good Marxist instance, but Lemmygrad and Hexbear are widely hated. Why is that? Are there any good leftist instances?
Lemmygrad and Hexbear aren’t “leftist” in the confused sense that Americans usually mean “leftist.” They’re actually leftist in the original sense, meaning that they want to abolish private ownership of the means of production. To the extent they’re “widely hated,” it’s largely because the Anglosphere has been indoctrinated against real, actual socialism their entire lives.
More often than not, when Americans say leftist they really mean left-liberalism a la Bernie Sanders, which is really center-left at most, and not actually leftist in the original sense, a sense which Americans have forgotten thanks to two Red Scares and the first Cold War.
True, but leninists are not leftist in any significant sense either. They are more authoritarian/ totalitarian than they are left or right.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
That’s not the part people have an issue with, the part where their users deny genocides, call everyone that has a less extreme left opinion of politics Nazis, end up being so “anti-racism” that they’re racists themselves and take all critics as personal attacks, that’s what people have an issue with.
Wild how much footage is coming out of Gaza right now showing an actual ongoing genocide, yet Zionists and their water-carriers will harp on and on about how Israel is merely defending itself.
Nothing of the sort from Xinjiang. At all.
I’d like to see ONE verifiable image or video depicting this supposed Uyghur genocide we’re denying. ONE. Apparently it’s one of the worst human atrocities occuring right now. One of the worst in HISTORY.
So… show me a single picture. Fetish porn doesn’t count. Where are the dead bodies? Where are these supposed mass graves?
Love to break it to ya, they don’t fucking exist and they never did. You’ve been lied to.
The US state department lawyers and the British House of Lords have evidence. That’s why they’re pursuing convictions of the Chinese leaders involved. No, wait— sorry, I misremembered. They both concluded there is insufficient evidence.
deleted by creator
So you agree that there is a strong argument for Russia seeking genocide in Ukraine as well, right?
Israel has killed more civilians (mostly children and women) in a month of war than Russia has killed in almost two years. The Russians actually target almost exclusively military infrastructure, they have preserved electrical grids, water stations, communications infrastructure, etc… Not because they are “good guys”, obviously, but it’s a part of their strategy. But it shows genocide is not a part of this strategy.
The article was written by Timofei Sergeitsev, a Russian “philosopher” with no direct link to the government. The article in the website you linked was written in early April 2022, very early after the war, when no one knew what to expect. It was claimed it was “proof” the Russians was intending to genocide Ukrainians.
More than a year later, have we seen anything like it? Have we seen active actions from the Russians to consistently destroy civilian buildings and systematically cause civilian casualties on purpose? I at least haven’t, unless we are talking about a completely different war which I’m not aware. I don’t excuse the Russians of anything, I’m sticking with the facts. The Russians have been very careful not to cause non-military casualties, which is extremely odd for a genocidal regime.
So, in short, it’s your article written by a guy with no links to the government vs. what the actual war itself shows in practice. I prefer to see what practice shows us.
Feels like ad hominem. The point is that you are unwilling to even engage with the idea that Russia seeks to eliminate Ukrainian identity, an idea which is reported by a number of primary Russian sources in a variety of media. Putin himself expresses frequent open skepticism of Ukrainian nationality. Not to even mention the internationally recognized mass deportation of children.
I won’t argue that Israel isn’t an apartheid state engaging in collective punishment. Meanwhile you will turn yourself in circles to defend Russian aggression, and for the life of me I can figure out what that has to do with liberating workers. It just feels less like intellectual honesty and more like campism. But then somehow I’m the brainwashed goon for actually attempting to maintain something resembling ideological consistency.
Written by Timofei Sergeitsev in RIA Novosti, the rhetoric in the editorial…
Oh so it’s not a “Kremlin paper”, it’s just what some guy thinks. If there are “no more Nazis in Ukraine than anywhere else” then there are no more nazis in Russia than anywhere else 🙃
their users deny genocides
If you are referring to the Xinjiang issue, then it just reaffirms what @davel@lemmy.ml just said:
it’s largely because the Anglosphere has been indoctrinated against real, actual socialism their entire lives
Because the “Uyghur genocide” in Xinjiang is another example of propaganda. Or do you really think the West cares about Muslims and want to protect their “freedom”?
call everyone that has a less extreme left opinion of politics Nazis
I don’t see anyone in Lemmygrad calling other people “Nazis” because they disagree with someone in a discussion. I usually see them criticizing others as “liberals.” This is either a misrepresentation of leftists in general, very common among conservatives, or you are frequently being called a Nazi. I don’t know, maybe that’s on you? 🤔
end up being so “anti-racism” that they’re racists themselves and take all critics as personal attacks
That’s so specific you should give at least one example of this. We have very strict moderation against any bigotry, so I challenge you to link any “racist” attitude or comment you have seen in Lemmygrad. I will give you 24 hours, and if you don’t reply with an example, I will edit this comment saying you chickened out.
EDIT: They chickened out, as expected.
And 24 hours have passed with no evidence! No sources! No citations! Typical unsubstantiated settler horseshit.
Another repeating problem is the vast generalizations. Treating “the West” as if they’re all Bush Jr. or Reagan.
If “the west” isn’t voting for Bush or Reagan then they’re hailing people like Obama, who destroyed Libya and brought back open air slave markets - or Clinton who destroyed Belgrade and undermined social protections for workers. To think you are somehow better because you support(ed?) Genocide Joe is just delusion.
I’m not even American yet still in “the west”, and refuse to be identified by American subpar ways of determining people in power.
Americrackers and their vassals
being in the west may as well mean you’re american, they tell you what to do, try saying no.
What’s your view on Trump?
Just as bad as Biden, Obama, Bush Jr., and both Clintons; deserving of the same International Criminal Court convictions as the five I just listed.
Fun fact: did you know the ICC has only ever prosecuted African nationals since its inception in 2002?
Critical support to Donald Trump in his mission to undermine the amerikkkan state, bless him for not hiring people to the state department and congratulations for his negotiation of capitulation to the Taliban
Ok, Stalin
The West ≠ Western citizens
North Atlantic imperialist countries is what we refer as “the West”. They have shared interests and in terms of foreign policy act almost in unison, so much so that a single term to describe North American and Western European countries is not a generalization, it’s quite appropriate actually.
Don’t act Reagan-adjacent and you won’t get pilloried for it. Considering you wanna throw around allegations of genocide denial with zero investigation and zero evidence, you sound less Reagan and a lot more Bush-- and subsequently deserve no right to serious speech.
Removed by mod
No one takes either the first or second seriously outside the US.
Don’t forget the rest of the International CommunityTM
International CommunityTM
Did you mean “the Crackerverse™”?
Removed by mod
This is the common refrain. It’s easier to believe we’re bots or shills than believe socialists walk among us
Given the comment you’re just responding to, that’s a level of not-self-reflection that’s usually reserved to /r/selfawarewolfs or the like.
Removed by mod
end up being so “anti-racism” that they’re racists themselves
lmao shut up
; settler tears are abundant in supply and abysmally low in both demand and qualityI love you and how you take the time to call out all of these comments.
I’m on break and I don’t celebrate Amerikan Genocide Day; I got nothin but time today homie
Removed by mod
Can you point to genocide denial before you make sweeping accusations?
Nope. Comment threads don’t work like that.
Okay so no evidence Hexbear or Lemmygrad have denied genocides?
Oh there certainly is. You gotta read those comment threads yourself.
It’s popped up in this one, too. It’s really curious how you can read and write enough to answer here, but not see that.
I’m not asking to see the comments for myself, I’m asking if you can point to evidence of this happening; it’s not the same question.
I understand. You refuse to accept something that is fairly obvious for many Lemmy users and want to put a burden of proof on me, and because I don’t want to take on additional work for someone I neither know nor agree with, you are happy to keep your opinion, as am I to keep mine.
end up being so “anti-racism” that they’re racists themselves
anyone complaining about “reverse racism” or “anti white racism” is a complete joke. like boo fucking hoo, someone called you a cracker on the internet, get over it.
That isn’t what they are talking about, hopefully. But if it is, I agree, a hearty “lol” is in order.
they replied confirming to me that what they were complaining about was in fact racism against white people, given that it seems to be a pretty common bit on lemmygrad to call people crackers and compare them to that kid who went onto fox news to complain about his face being photoshopped onto a picture of a ritz cracker by left wing students at his university that seems to be what they were complaining about
Bad interpretation is bad
Racism has a definition that’s fairly easy to understand and yes people of all colors can be victims and even people of the same skin colour can be racists against one another because racism isn’t necessarily about the color of your skin, it can be about your ethnicity.
Racism:
prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership in a particular racial or ethnic group, typically one that is a minority or marginalized.Ethnicity:
the quality or fact of belonging to a population group or subgroup made up of people who share a common cultural background or descent.If you had taken a crowd of anonymous Germans all dressed the same in 1935, how would you have told who was a Jew and who wasn’t? You wouldn’t have been able to because they were all just white people.
What do you call it when 100 years ago in a first world white country the population that speaks one official language has an infant mortality rate comparable to that of colonial Africa while the population that speaks the other official language and lives in the same cities has an infant mortality rate comparable to any other first world nation?
Was the Rwanda genocide not racism because it was two groups with the same skin colour? What about what happened in Yugoslavia?
My white friend who went to China to study had to sit through multiple explanations by many Chinese student of the levels of intelligence being affected by skin colour and ethnicity and guess what, whites weren’t at the top! “All white people are dumber than Indians who are dumber than Koreans who are dumber than Chinese.” Are you telling me that isn’t racism against white people (and anyone that isn’t Chinese)? Because I sure would hope someone would call me a racist if I was saying the same thing about people of another skin colour or ethnicity!
you see i have pulled out the dictionary definition of racism and also an annecdote about how a country colonized by white people for centuries can actually be racist against my white friend for calling him a ‘cracker’, defeating your arguement
racism against white people
lmao shut up
Racism is not easy to understand and you’re definitely not going to get a clear understanding of it from reading a definition especially if you’re white. I suggest you read some books. Good heavens maybe your racist Chinese friend is right.
Edit I hear this is a good book
White fragility by Robin diangelo
Removed by mod
So you’re saying that what the Jews were victim of during WW2 wasn’t racism? Because they certainly were white!
How about the Irish? The deportation of Acadians? French Canadians seeing their language becoming illegal to teach in Manitoba? The Yugoslav wars?
By your logic it’s also impossible to be racist towards Chinese and Japanese because man, let me tell you, they can be racist as fuck towards everyone else and they were the ones in power on their side of the world for centuries!
Racism has a definition and it’s a bad thing no matter who the victim is.
European Jews were not considered white before and during WW2. Whiteness has always changed with whatever we needed it to be for political reasons. The Irish were not considered white. In South Africa during Apartheid, a Japanese national was forbidden by a bus driver from entering a whites-only bus because the driver thought he was Chinese. The man sued and won against the driver as the Japanese were considered white and allowed to board segregated buses.
Removed by mod
It’s funny how it’s always the same whenever you’re confronted to arguments. You just insult the other party and leave the scene like you were a hero.
Also very funny you should call me a cracker when you don’t know what’s my origin, you just assume I’m white because you would be unable to accept that someone not white could realize that racism goes all ways.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
sh.itsfulla.nazis being a nazi bar? Perish the thought!
Thanks for providing an example of what I was talking about :)
deleted by creator
Extremely accurate
I literally netted a 2 week sitewide-ban on one of my alts in this thread for a softer worded take than this
Don’t know how I managed to escape consequences so far 😂
Holy shit you got them to brigade your comment. They might as well be bots, I think Chat GPT’s “intelligence” outpaces them.
I believe it says far more about your own reading comprehension skills if you can’t tell us - human beings sick and tired of Empire apologia - apart from the usually incomprehensible shit salad that language models currently like to present as coherent.
Maybe if you actually read more, you’d be able to discern the difference. 🤷♂️
As is tradition! What’s funny is that they’re supposed to be defederated from my instance so I don’t know why they even see my comments… Their admin even called my instance “sh.itsfullof.nazis” in their defederation message because they were angry that they were confronted to people who disagreed with them when they brigaded our administration communities…
They have a community dedicated to organizing brigades so it’s no surprise that they are brigading their comment
The rules in the side bar are very telling
Of course the last time I mentioned it’s existence with one of my alts I got a 2 week sitewide-ban so this comment probably won’t last long
Edit: Spleling
The “Uyghur genocide” is bullshit Atlanticist propaganda, and English-language Wikipedia is basically NATOpedia in its slant on the topic, so yes we will deny it. It’s a product of the new Cold War propaganda campaign against China.
I get why people would believe it like a decade ago when the facts were still kind of up in the air, but now even west media is like “yeaaah we looked into it and all of it is complete and utter bullshit” and yet you still have people confidently going on like it’s still a thing.
Eventually you have to come to the grips with the fact that the only reason you believe in the Uyghur genocide is because you’re racist.
Atlanticist crackers are exactly why I’m a third-worldist; I genuinely care more about my community’s diaspora than I’d ever care about these genocidal neocolonist crackers
Here are some properties of any conspiracy theory worth it’s name:
- Closed Ideological Systems: They provide an all-encompassing explanation for various events or states, with everything fitting into their worldview.
- Immunity to Facts: Any contrary evidence is dismissed as false or considered part of the conspiracy.
- Enemy Construction: They tend to draw a clear line between “us” (those who “know the truth”) and “them” (the supposed conspirators).
- Adaptability: Conspiracy narratives can change and incorporate new “evidence” or events to maintain their credibility.
It matches for QAnon and the MAGA crowd as well as the lemmygrad crowd.
not having the self awareness to realize this applies to anti-communists, not communists/MLs as they use scientific reasoning.
Just to understand what you are saying, do you say communists apply scientific reasoning?
Yes, the foundation of most communists reasoning is based on sociology.
That’s very abstract and doesn’t mean much. With as many words you can say capitalism is based on scientific reasoning.
Yes, Marxism is based on a scientific methodology called historical materialism. It’s too complex to be explained in a single comment, but it has an internal logic and methodology which proposes to analyze social systems in general, but especially capitalist societies in particular.
You can’t use the scientific method used in the natural sciences because you can’t put a society in a lab to study it. Social sciences require a methodology apart from the natural sciences, and Marxism has proposed historical materialism, which is very consistent and coherent approach, based on the Hegelian dialectical logic with materialism as a principle.
How ironic! Let’s see if it fits for the “genocide” position:
-
Closed Ideological Systems: Whether those who defend the idea of “genocide” in Xinjiang are aware or not, the sources used to claim there is a genocide in Xinjiang is usually Adrian Zenz, a German white supremacist and Christian fundamentalist who claimed in his book Worthy to Escape that “other belief systems are ultimately inspired by Satan” and justifies “eternal punishment” for those who refuse to believe in Jesus.
-
Immunity to Facts: Every time one tries to argue that Xinjiang faced a policy of de-radicalization of terrorists who led many attacks against the province, those who claim there is a genocide there say they are “genocide deniers.” I’ve even seen people saying those who don’t agree with the “genocide” position are paid by the Chinese.
-
Enemy Construction: I can’t even count the number of times people have called those who don’t promote the “genocide” propaganda “tankies” and dismissing them instead of engaging with arguments.
-
Adaptability: The “genocide” propaganda claims there is a genocide there, and then when presented with the fact that even those who were put in the re-education facilities were allowed to express their culture with dances and art on video, the “genocide” conspiracy theorists say that it was a fake, an act, that it was a spectacle organized by the Chinese to hide the genocide. Just to give you an example.
It does match the “genocide” position very well. I’ve yet to see a genocide which preserves the language, the culture, the customs and the places of worship of a people. Another thing, notice the reaction of Muslim countries to the actual genocide being perpetrated by Israel. They are firmly condemning it through all channels. In contrast, the policies of de-radicalization by the Chinese were unanimously well-received by Muslim countries.
Another thing, notice the reaction of Muslim countries to the actual genocide being perpetrated by Israel. They are firmly condemning it through all channels. In contrast, the policies of de-radicalization by the Chinese were unanimously well-received by Muslim countries.
Very generous of you to assume that many of these folk believe Muslims and Arabs are human beings capable of forming their own opinions and international policy. The opinions of actual Muslims are similarly handwaved akin to any communist’s opinion.
These states’ international defense of China’s de-radicalization program is stated to merely be because they are money-hungry opportunists, buddying up with China while ignoring a politically and economically inconvenient genocide. 🙄 How… adaptable this narrative is.
The seemingly unending wave of videos of Uyghurs in China recording themselves in their homes and making it clear they are not undergoing genocide have to be ignored. In fact, they have to be deleted by the platforms hosting them. How utterly immune to facts this narrative is.
If these countries care about Palestine, oh… I don’t know. Russia is making them care. Iran, maybe? Maybe North Korea or China are forcing these Muslims to hate Israel. Who else are we being directed to hate right now? Afghanistan? Just throw a dart at the “Axis of Evil” board and pick an “uncivilized” nation. It’s their fault. Why not?
-
That’s a liberal with no framework. No one denies genocides (pro-tip just because the western media says it’s a genocide doesn’t make it a genocide.) Being so anti-racist you are the real racist is the Liberal Democratic party who elected a hard-core segregationist as president, not a Marxist Leninist. No one except people like you give a fuck about personal attacks. lol.
Any politically focused space on the Internet, left or right, is a cesspool of toxic lies and hatred of anyone outside their sphere
British. Immediately discarded.
The OG colonizer scum? DEFINITELY discarded. Into the woodchipper with TERF island scumbags.
I guess this answers OPs question!
That’s what we call racism
L M F A O
Motherfuck the Brits and any expectation they’re owed ANY kind of respect lmfao lmfao lmfao
im british and i give them the g-word pass (gammon) to refer to british people in a derogatory way
Oh so y’all got a pig(derogatory) equivalent too! Baller.
They are hardline Marxist-Leninists, something that is very rare in the western world even amongst those who identify as leftist or socialist. If their views make you uncomfortable, then you’re not a ML, which is okay.
Left-wing politics is a very broad spectrum, and a lot of Lemmy users lean towards the more moderate end which brings them into conflict with the more radical communities that are Lemmygrad and Hexbear.
That’s all there is to it.
deleted by creator
And they’re not artificially suppressed like they are on other social media platforms.
*depending on what instance you’re on
They are defederated from a lot of instances, from their own side or the other’s (my instance is defederated from LG and HB defederated itself from my instance)
A correction: Lemmygrad and Hexbear are two different instances, and it’s an oversimplification to lump them in together. Lemmygrad does not defederate from any real instance, we have possibly one of the smallest block lists of any bigger instances.
That’s all there is to it.
That’s it? Nothing about their notoriety for posting pictures of pigs pooping on their balls as part of their lively defense of MLism?
That’s not a defense, per se; that’s them telling you you are no longer worth the dialogue. You crackers aren’t worth debating.
I can’t speak about lemmygrad since the instances I’m on all defederate from it, but Hexbear users have a reputation for being generally aggressive, grating, and immature. It’s like that kid in class who keeps interrupting the teacher because they think they’re funny and clever. e.g., some were screaming at me that I can’t be an anarchist and I know nothing about anarchism since I’m married, replying with third-grade tier memes for some confusing reason
Removed by mod
I fully agree. The problem is when we point out that they’re not leftist, they assume it’s because we conflate leftism with liberalism, whereas this is not the case at all. I think they’re not leftist because their antisocial/anti-human beliefs are antithetical to the concept of community and only serve to derail any chance we have to work together to create a new system. I can’t imagine that anyone who legitimately seeks the goal of a stateless, classless society would behave as they do.
Thought I should add it was them informing me that certain countries banning same-sex marriage while endorsing heterosexual marriage is just fine, actually. They espoused an objectively homophobic belief, and when I referenced my own marriage, they switched to calling me ignorant about anarchism. There are anarchist texts exploring the issue and some of the potential problems with traditions like marriage, but it’s not dogma. Nor do I view my own relationship as hierarchical.
TL;DR They were being objectively homophobic.
This has the energy of a white gay man in a marriage pointing at a trans polycule and calling them homophobic because they said he had a bad take about how bourgeois privileges are more important than positive rights for queer homeless people.
White gay men wielding their gayness as a cudgel against people who are queerer and more marginalized then them sure is a gross thing to see.
Your comment is a perfect example of the pants-shittingly off-topic LGBTphobic nonsense I was receiving in the other thread, so thanks for proving my point.
You … you do realize that trans people and other “queerer” people than me engage in same-sex marriage too, right? And that it’s objectively homophobic for a policy to exist forbidding same-sex marriage while permitting heterosexual marriage? And that not all trans people are poly? I know people that fit all of the above, and every one of them deserves validation, and it would be unfathomably LGBTphobic for me to arbitrarily determine which ones are “queer enough” to be part of the community. You don’t see the problem with this line of thinking, with your entire statement? Of course you do, you’re just being deliberately cruel for your own amusement.
There it is, folks. Exhibit A
Edit: That user is a moderator on !worldnews@lemmy.ml
I’m unsubscribing immediately! And I blocked and reported that user, too.
My love is for all the LGBT+ community, and for the straight cis community as well. I just want equity. For anyone who had to read that homophobic comment above, just know that I do care, and I’m here for you.
You sound like one of these kind of gays; please quit the bad-faith crybully phobia-jacketing bullshit
As several scholars have noted, contemporary gay life is marked by high levels of racism directed towards gay men of color by gay white men, with much of the racism manifesting itself as negative sexual attitudes towards, and sexual exclusion or fetishization of, non-white men (Armstrong 2002; Bérubé 2001; Epstein 1996; McBride 2005; Tenunis, 2007).
And that it’s objectively homophobic for a policy to exist forbidding same-sex marriage while permitting heterosexual marriage?
Yes!
Do you acknowledge that some countries like the US which allow gay marriage materially harm lgbt people more than some countries that have banned gay marriage? Or is it only homophobic when it impacts your middle class ass?
Do you acknowledge that many socialist countries are progressive and moving toward more rights, and just starting from a worse starting point because of violently enforced colonial attitudes from countries that now claim to be progressive?
Do you acknowledge that Cuba, a socialist nation that you’d accuse of being tankie, is the place where lgbt people have the most material rights?
Do you acknowledge that communists have led every single queer liberation movement that has forced concessions from ruling governments? Or do you want to whitewash the communists out of stonewall?
You … you do realize that trans people and other “queerer” people than me engage in same-sex marriage too, right?
Yes, I’m one of them. And I’d happily give up my right to be married if it would erase queer homelessness, and erase conversion therapy camps, and erase the continual murder of black and indigenous trans women in our society.
Removed by mod
Do you want to hear the punchline? I caught a temp ban for expressing my plan to block their instance as soon as that is made possible for users. I will admit I was a bit harsh in that I said I wanted them to be “effectively silenced,” but this was extremely mild compared to their comments to me.
Lemmygrad does have its heated gamer moments but overall they’re waaaaay better than hexbear when it comes to post quality.
Liberals hate communists more than they hate fascists
Liberals don’t even really hate fascists, they just pretend to condemn them to keep up international appearances; as the past year’s slippage, then shameless tearing-off of the mask has shown us. No one should be surprised by this, either-- the American way has always been clad in a pointy white robe, clutching a rifle in white-knuckled hands; if you peel back all the mythologizing.
Its a country founded on genocide that deported as many communists as they could in the 50s then killed and arrested the rest that remained.
Lets not forget the active genocides they carried out in vietnam or the middle east either, or the concentration camp they have open on cuba.
Is that Cuban concentration camp still being used? Where is your proof?
Since 2002, the base has included the detainment camp for individuals deemed of risk to United States national security. In 2009, the U.S. President, Barack Obama, gave orders for the detention camp to close by January 22, 2010. As of 2021, it remains open due to a congressional refusal of funds for its closure.
Indeed, liberalism is just a precursor of fascism https://orgrad.wordpress.com/articles/liberalism-the-two-faced-tyranny-of-wealth/
Sorry for my ignorance, but I think liberal means something else in my part of the world. Can you please tell me what’s your definition?
Edit: As I thought - you guys mean Neoliberalism. Even in the links below it’s mentioned that there was a split in terms. Language matters! Liberalism - a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights and civil liberties (the opposite in the political spectrum from authoritarianism).
they’re not using liberal in the american sense of liberal meaning gay blue haired woman with pronouns and vegan lattes that conservatives get mad at (in general theres a lot of queer vegan women with pronouns and colourful hair on hexbear); they’re defining liberal in the marxist sense in that its people who support capitalism but arent currently fascists, so this includes conservatives, neoliberals, social democrats, and all sorts in it. Their comment seems to be applying more specifically to the ideologically committed liberals as opposed to mostly apolitical people who just say, “oh yeah i guess i;ll vote democrat this time” once every 4 years and have that be the extent of their politcal consciousness
Some more resources:
On Liberalism
- Why do communists dislike liberals?, 2
- What about free speech?
- Why do leftists think that FDR co-opted the left to “save” capitalism?
- What’s wrong with democrats ( insert moderate party here ) ?
- Why not vote for the lesser of two evils (Lesser-evilism)?
- Can’t we change the democrats from within?
- What about “moderates” like Jimmy Carter? Can’t we push them to change?
- Can’t we use voting to solve our problem? Is violence really necessary? What about Martin Luther King Jr. and Gandhi? audiobook
- Malcolm X on liberals.
It’s nonsense statements like this that should provide the answer to OP’s question. When push came to shove in WW2, liberalism in the US, UK, and elsewhere sided with communism against fascism.
Did they now?
If a communist isn’t hated by the capitalist establishment, he isn’t a real communist. (I do not imply that being hated by the establishment alone qualifies you to be a communist)
And the remainder of lemmy is the capitalist establishment?
Nah, you’re wannabes who will never hold enough capital to count, which is why we slag you when you dig in your heels in the first place. There’s nothing more simultaneously sad or funny than ‘temporarily embarrassed’ capitalists with no capital; especially when you haven’t even bothered scrubbing the Oxford polish off your lips before fixing them to talk to us. You are footsoldiers of chauvinist racism, colonial genocide, and climate apocalypse, and you will be the death of all of us.
With all that in mind, what makes you think you or yours are owed any respectful dialogue?
- Full of insults and yet- asks others how they think they’re owned respectful dialogue.
THIS Is the perfect example of the children in Lemmygrad and Hexbear.
I own two shoe factories and a cotton farm, you?
Lemmygrad isn’t “hated” by most of the wider lemmyverse. There’s just a loud and obnoxious minority of people that will rail and rant about lemmygrad. They loudly rant about lemmygrad because they aren’t used to seeing their worldview get challenged and by its very nature as a radical leftist community, lemmygrad is a challenge to the typical background liberal perspective.
It’s no surprise we all end up seeing a lot of threads about “those mean tankies at lemmygrad” (and hexbear too) made by people who can’t take their worldview getting questioned, or even shown to be flawed, or just not standing up to their own scrutiny, and who get mad when that happens. There are also of course people with ideological reasons to demonize leftwing politics and will spread shit for that reason alone. But overall, I don’t think most people care enough except to think “oh yeah that’s that instance with those radical lefties, they’re weird but they do make some great memes sometimes.”
Political views aside, the way they promote their political views is unappealing.
Look through any of their popular threads. Everyone piles on any comment which doesn’t align perfectly with the agreed perspective.
Everyone piles on any comment which doesn’t align perfectly with the agreed perspective.
Sounds like every popular community on Lemmy. The only difference is the “agreed perspective”.
Not really.
In most communities you can at least entice some robust discussion, hexbear just seems sp aggressively intolerant of alternative views.
alternative views like ‘being racist’ and ‘advocating for genocide’
Look, how can we be tolerant if we don’t tolerate intolerance
-Genocide Joe probably
Removed by mod
Love how at the very idea of somebody disagreeing with you, you start throwing up all sorts of topics you know are hot buttons just so you can preemptively slam anyone who has a different perspective than you. Rather than taking a second to teach a single thing about the topics you claim to care about you just flash them like political merit badges to prove you’re in the in-group, and anybody who doesn’t know exactly what one of those things are, or what you think is the truth about it, is worth dismissing out of hand. It’s just a secret handshake that if people don’t parrot it back to you they’re not worth debating. You were never here for healthy debate though. You don’t care about convincing anyone or advancing your causes or ideas. You’re here for the badges.
>sh.itsfulla.nazis poster
>demanding to be debated seriously with no attempt on their part to do any kind of proper, scientifically-sound investigation
>mfw
@JungleJim@sh.itjust.works your assessment of @TheAnоnymоuseJоker@lemmy.ml is spot-on, highlighting behaviors indicative of a fragile ego and a need for superiority. This individual frequently deflects from central topics, especially when their views are challenged, revealing an inability to handle opposing viewpoints. It’s normal to have differences in opinion, but for TheAnоnymоuseJоker this seems to be an act of war, a mindset that is immature and counterproductive for meaningful online interactions.
Psychologically, it’s a common fallacy for some individuals to oversimplify complex social interactions, reducing them to mere players in the game of their subjective perception. This viewpoint often ignores the nuanced realities of human behavior and interaction.
Recognizing these behaviors — deflecting, causing dismay, dismissing, denying, deceiving — is essential in understanding the underlying motivations and responding appropriately to maintain the integrity of the discussion.
Removed by mod
Analyzing me psychologically? That’s an interesting deflection, TheAnonymouseJoker. You claim I’m engaging in deflective and ignorant behavior, yet here you are, quickly labeling and dismissing my points without addressing their substance. It’s quite telling that instead of engaging with the critique, you resort to calling out my account’s age and my supposed affiliations. This tactic of yours, focusing on personal attacks rather than the discussion at hand, really highlights the earlier point about your tendency to dismiss and belittle differing opinions. It seems like any perspective that doesn’t align with yours is automatically considered ‘contextless liberal rants and libel.’ Isn’t that, in itself, a form of intellectual compromise? Let’s stick to the actual content of the discussion, shall we?
Removed by mod
See, this is why people have problems with ML and hexbears. How will you ever bring the revolution when you can’t stop screeching? Nobody wants that. Nobody wants to be around it. You’ll be a revolution of one because nobody can take being around such an abrasive asshole long enough to even listen to their points, much less realize they might be right.
Imagine somebody walking down the street. They see a poster on the wall of the store they pass. It’s a Starbucks. “Looks tasty, I’m cold” they say. Suddenly, you’re there, shrieking about labor rights and fair trade. You are without a doubt correct, but you’ve scared the person and now they’re annoyed. One of those drones inside with the green hats comes out and sees the situation. They ask the customer to come inside where they’re safe from you, and now they’re buying overpriced drinks from exploited workers produced by exploited farmers etc.
All because instead of talking to someone like a human, you had to be edgy and witty. You treat real humans the way tv characters talk to each other. On TV the wittiest oneo-liner wins. In real life you have to show a little human compassion, even if you’re faking it or else you alienate who you’re talking to and are left in an echo chamber, alone, or in the case of our imagined scenario the employees may call security or police (agents of oppression, and they’ll probably buy coffee too) on a person harassing potential customers.
“some leftists were mean to me on a meaningless forum so i voted to uphold the fascist amerikan status quo” you are a fucking child lmao
Removed by mod
His tendency to dismiss and belittle differing opinions aligns with the behavior of making jokes at someone else’s expense, a red flag of his intention to demean rather than engage. This approach not only stifles productive discourse but also exposes their inability to appreciate the nuances in complex issues. The mark of a first-rate intelligence is holding two opposed ideas while still functioning, *a capacity *TheAnоnymоuseJоker seems to lack. He demonstrates an inability to see a world where an idea can be both right and wrong, as seen in his black-and-white arguments.
You’ll be a revolution of one
Ironically, and I quote him:
powerless against one many army
Furthermore, the consistent denial and projection of his biases onto others underscore his low self-esteem and desire to control and influence the narrative. This manipulation, characterized by deceiving and creating misleading narratives, aligns with the observation that the most argumentative people rarely persuade anyone. Persuasion is an art that requires observation, listening, and inquiry, not blunt force.
That’s a very mature response
It’s also crucial to consider the source of advice or criticism. TheAnоnymоuseJоker’s attacks are reminiscent of those who criticize yet have never built anything themselves. Their actions seems more about garnering attention than offering constructive criticism. One cannot be offended by someone they do not respect. It’s important to take advice from those you respect and who contribute positively, not from those who seek to destroy. TheAnоnymоuseJоker should address the need for maturity and constructive engagement rather than dismissive or sarcastic remarks.
Removed by mod
Ukraine good Russia bad?
Sorry I don’t side with imperialism.
Ukraine wants to not be invaded by it’s neighbor, and Russia did so to conquer it in direct contradiction to a treaty it signed when Ukraine gave it’s nukes to Russia after the fall of the Soviet Union. On multiple occasions.
Removed by mod
Did Russia not invade Ukraine’s sovereign territory?
That’s a pretty big rock you’ve been living under to miss that.
Removed by mod
Do you actually believe these things or do you just say them to try to get a rise out of people because I’ve never been able to work that one
Removed by mod
It’s evident that the your not interested in a genuine exchange of ideas or healthy debate. By rapidly switching topics and using them as shields rather than points of discussion, you’re clearly employing tactics like deflecting and deceiving. These types of methods serve to derail the conversation and assert dominance rather than contribute meaningfully.
Classic case of using hot-button issues not to educate or enlighten but to create an ‘in-group’ and outcast those who question or differ. This approach isn’t just unproductive; it’s an attempt to manipulate the discourse for personal gratification rather than collective understanding.
Recognizing these tactics is the first step in not falling victim to them and maintaining the integrity of the discussion
Removed by mod
That’s basically every political sub I’ve come across browsing in my instance
It’s a question of degree.
Lemmygrad and Hexbear are cool. IDK why you wouldn’t like them if you’re a leftist.
Hexbear in particular has been annoying in the past with nonsense comments from users there, and so many unhelpful replies that are just a tiny animated image and nothing else. I’m not even sure they actually are leftist as much as just trolls a lot of times, so I’ve blocked the instance in general so that serious leftist conversations aren’t being drowned out by that nonsense.
If it looks like someone from hexbear (such as yourself here) is making a real contribution then I’ll reveal that comment and engage. It’s a shame there are so many goofballs on that instance, apparently. Maybe their moderation has improved though?
I think there was a culture shock when federation first hit. We had a ton of ‘engagement’ from people who were using ableist, racist, and transphobic slurs, which brought out strong reactions from our community because we believe its important to shut that stuff down on solidarity with our comrades. And as things got heated I think our willingness to believe people wanted good faith debate eroded.
We do love a good dunking though, and I think overall the community has a lower threshold for going full pig poop balls on people than I would prefer.
Valid criticisms tbh (I even could say the same as a day 0 account lol)
Moderation isn’t going to “improve” because they generally are fine with everyone being goofballs, so I wouldn’t expect that.
Some people have the cascade of shitposting and useless emojis coming with their crappy views, but I don’t think our instance is great at propaganda or ROE, which is unfortunate. Would love to see what we could do with a little discipline.
Also the emojis on every other instance and all mobile apps look more obnoxious because they don’t downscale to their intended resolution.
so many unhelpful replies that are just a tiny animated image and nothing else
Here on kbin I don’t even see that, just text links with names like “pig poop balls”.
How did you manage to block the instance individually? I thought that feature wasn’t released yet…?
I’m using Connect which has the feature to block instances. It shows comments from all users on a blocked instance collapsed behind a spoiler of sorts that can be clicked to reveal if desired.
Not to mention that before federating, hexbear always had a soft aura of antisemitism floating around it. They’ve cleared house of it since but I remember wondering why they were so disproportionally vitriolic about Trotsky until I learned he was Jewish, then it all started to click.
Honestly I wouldn’t even be remotely surprised if I found out in a couple decades that website was run as controlled opposition. Feels like everything there is designed to either placate or turn people away from communism rather than push them towards understanding it. Compare it to Lemmygrad where they’ll reach a hand out to help reactionaries be less reactionary but on hexbear they just post a picture of a pig shitting on its balls and hurl harassing comments their way as if that’s somehow going to make them any less anticommunist. (and as a fine bonus, all those comments boosts their reactionary bullshit to the top of the federation for everyone to see)
Opposing a settler colonial, apartheid State, which has been ethnically cleansing for three generations and is committing genocide as we speak, is not a “soft aura of antisemitism”.
Obviously not, i’m talking about the people there who were using the leftist environment to shield their actual antisemitism. That shit’s been since wiped off the platform but that wasn’t the case back when I was there.
You know the kind. The ones who would call them “Jews” rather than “Zionists” where if it was posted on reddit nobody would have trouble seeing the antisemitism for what it was but because it was hexbear it obfuscated their actual intentions. Outright antisemitism would get punished pretty hard which is why it’s a soft aura, since it just kinda hung around in the background seeing how much it could get away with. The mods/admins tendency to just ban people who went against the grain resulted in that shit being passively protected for years until the federation forced them to be at least somewhat accountable where blatantly silencing criticism wasn’t going to fly anymore.
Oh, thanks. I’m glad I got to the party late then!
Yeah, you guys get the cool hexbear.
I’m glad you view my instance in a more positive light, and I can’t comment on early Hexbear culture, but I am still so very confident, absolutely positive, that the hate you’re seeing for Trotsky is not because of his religion.
Nah I get reasons why he would get hate but it always went just a little bit beyond that. It almost felt like they had just that little extra motivation. Not that it matters anyway, because like I said they’ve cleared house of that sort of thing so it’s an anachronism at this point.
I’m a leftist that doesn’t like hanging with racists and totalitarians, that’s why I don’t like them.
I don’t think you even know what “totalitarianism” is. You know why? Because that term doesn’t mean anything. It was popularized by Hannah Arendt, an academic author indirectly associated with the CIA (as thoroughly discussed by Frances Stonor Saunders in her book The Cultural Cold War). The term was used in the context of the Cold War to promote the idea that the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany were the same thing or very similar. It served the interests of the US and Western European countries.
Now to call our userbase racist, I would expect at least further explanation. We have very strict moderation, and racist garbage is severely dealt with. So if you seen someone being racist in Lemmygrad, please let me know. I’m an admin there, and we could quickly resolve this. If you haven’t, then you should quietly think with yourself why you are lying to others here. You hate us based on a lie?
Bro, liberal IS a race. By Dunkin’ on Liberals, you might as well be genociding Palestinians .
Michael Parenti: Left anti-communism: The Unkindest Cut
You’re on itjustworks, you’re not a leftist, you’re a social fascist.
You realise that the instance has open registration that doesn’t require a specific political allegiance? I’m on it because it’s local, I would have chosen any other local instance if it wasn’t this one.
Your gaslighting tactics aren’t going to work here.
Removed by mod
Lemmygrad I can’t comment on. As far as I can tell they basically just talk politics and I’m not interested in microwaving my brain by obsessing about politics online. Haven’t seen them out in any of the threads I’ve been on.
Hexbear I’ve enjoyed honestly. They’ve got nice hobby communities and it’s all I’m here for. Quality of discussion is usually pretty good. My take on people hating Hexbear is people have made their personality getting mad about politics and Hexbear don’t share their views. People screaming “tankie!” just seemed deranged to me, literally who cares what a handful of nerds in the US think of China. Neither of you have any influence on what China does at all.
I’ve been trying to find a good Marxist instance, but Lemmygrad and Hexbear are widely hated. Why is that?
Because the majority of Ledditors are either liberals or full blown reactionaries and the ones who are not range from some cringey techno-libertarian who think FOSS will usher in socialism to some radlib cruise-missile socialist who strangely never deviates from the US state department. The very few who could legitimately be considered socialists are some kind of anarchist. They certainly aren’t Marxist.
Are there any good leftist instances?
Outside of those two, I won’t hold my breath. The easiest litmus test in the world is how they’re responding to the genocide at Gaza. There’s very few places where you’ll get complete support for the Palestinian liberation struggle and not whining about the imaginary babies Hamas allegedly beheaded or trying to equate the conduct of a genocidal nuclear power to a paramilitary fighting for national liberation.
They’re both good instances. People have been heavily propagandized to hate communists. You could make the kindest most welcoming space on the internet and if you put the label “communist” on it, it will be hated.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Sounds like Lemmy’s version of r/atheism 10+ years ago. Atheism itself is fine, but the sub became an insufferable circle jerk.
“Tankie” is a term that’s applied to literally any communist. I’ve heard it used against Trotskyists and fucking social democrats.
So, what’s actually the problem with them? Are they Maoists? CPC apologists?
They like Stalin, Putin , Xi and Kim. And defend everything they do.
Like WTF? How can a communist defend putin!?
How can someone misrepresent so bad what we defend? Yes, we indeed like Stalin, Xi Jinping and Kim Jong-un. They are/were commendable leaders who suffer from delusional propaganda created by the West. I don’t claim they are perfect, like Stalin personally committed mistakes (I say personally because he wasn’t the only leader in the USSR, there was a collective leadership by the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union), but we don’t like Putin.
We understand the Ukraine war as a result of NATO expansion and aggression. But Putin is a right-wing conservative leader. We understand Russia as a capitalist country, but also a nation with the right to self-determine its destiny, like all other nations. And the West, through NATO and the extreme right-wing (fascist) puppet regime in Ukraine, has been trying to undermine the sovereignty and self-determination of Russia.
Though we criticize Putin as a leader and the Russian government in general, we support Russia’s right to defend itself from aggression. It’s a more nuanced position than “defending Putin” like liberal “leftists” usually portray.
Regarding the 2nd point I just cannot see it.
Whilst I do admit that the US loves their devious little diplomatic plays I doubt Ukraine would have joined NATO. Take Sweden as an example to showcase how hard it actually is for a country to join the alliance if one country doesn’t play the game. And pre-war Ukraine would likely have faced backlash by more than just one country.
Even during the war when public support in the west for Ukraine was at it’s peak, when asked about if he could concretize what safety guarantees the G7 countries could give to a post-war Ukraine, German chancellor Olaf Scholz just replied: “Yes, I could…” and refused to elaborate further.
And French president Macron once considered NATO as a whole to be “brain dead” and wanted to shift it’s focus away from it. (A view I shared back then)
And now, a few years later NATO is - even by a lot of people who once opposed it - regarded as a safety guarantee with Finland and Sweden joining. So if the plan was to prevent an aggressive NATO expansion towards Russia’s borders that plan failed miserably and at the cost of thousands of civilians and soldiers, the world economics and the environment.
Only the arms industry profits now.
Whilst I do admit that the US loves their devious little diplomatic plays I doubt Ukraine would have joined NATO
Here are mentions of Ukraine in the last NATO Summit before the war:
- We reiterate our support for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine, Georgia, and the Republic of Moldova within their internationally recognised borders. […]
- We reiterate the decision made at the 2008 Bucharest Summit that Ukraine will become a member of the Alliance with the Membership Action Plan (MAP) as an integral part of the process; we reaffirm all elements of that decision, as well as subsequent decisions, including that each partner will be judged on its own merits. […]
Whether, they intended to accept Ukraine as an actual member of NATO, it’s an undeniable fact that NATO has been expanding to Eastern Europe and towards Russia. It’s an undeniable fact that the Ukrainian governments at least since 2014 have been promoting anti-Russian rhetoric and attacking Russian civilians inside the country. It’s an undeniable fact that NATO and Ukraine have been doing many exercises and drills for years, as well as other non-NATO countries close to Russia, such as Georgia and Moldova.
So if the plan was to prevent an aggressive NATO expansion towards Russia’s borders that plan failed miserably and at the cost of thousands of civilians and soldiers, the world economics and the environment.
I don’t think that was Russia’s plan. NATO will continue expanding irrespective of what Russia does, because Russia has a huge territory which would be more useful to exploit by Western countries if it was fragmented and balkanized. This is a Western plan since Nazi Germany and has been in operation since then. What Russia has done was a preemptive attack against an aggressive regime spewing Nazi rhetoric against Russians with full military and logistic support by the US and Europe. What prompted the Russian leadership to being the invasion was the US sending military equipment such as intermediate and short-range ballistic and cruise missiles to Ukraine, already preparing for war.
If Russia did not invade Ukraine, it would have been the other way around in a matter of time. It was thoroughly planned by Western countries and leadership for years.
What exactly is the problem with 14. this is how it should be. After all, borders shouldn’t be recognised for nothing you know.
- does indeed highlight the goal of Ukraine becoming an eventual member but it doesn’t state when. They’d certainly need to clarify Crimea first so that Ukraine doesn’t join and trigger Article 5 on Crimea. And as I said, looking at Sweden I’d not be so sure about the if either.
And even if Ukraine became a member state it wouldn’t be that easy to just attack Russia and expect NATO to help. They’re not allowed to trigger Article 5 if they are the aggressor and triggering Article 4 would likely not succeed as the risks of (nuclear) backlash are too high. I am aware that I am making assumptions here, and that this part might vary depending on the picture you have of NATO and their member states but I am certain, that they would not be so stupid to trigger a war that would likely be very unpopular within the populations of the various member states. But that point is overall highly debatable.
Regarding the point about Nato expansion: yes, the fact that it has expanded regardless of that oral treaty is a pity. But on the other hand, why would you so desperately hold on to something that apparently wasn’t even worth making a REAL treaty for. A signed one on paper. You cannot tell me anybody would be naive enough to take something that was orally agreed on without a signed treaty on paper for granted when the last decades have made it clear that sometimes even signed treaties aren’t worth their paper. Of course it’s a move of betrayal for Russia but as I mentioned, the US is good at provoking and oral assurances aren’t exactly something I would trust.
And on the other Hand, Russia hasn’t been that innocent either with a habit of solving disagreements with especially Georgia & Ukraine by using deterrence and the sledgehammer. And fair enough, that Ukraine hasn’t been innocent either. That’s for example why I was pretty neutral / hostile towards both sides before the war began. I especially dislike(d) how badly Ukraine tried and still tries to erase it’s Soviet history.
But (at least for me) that still does not justify the means.
Regarding your last claim: do you have any evidence to back that up? I heard numerous claims that both Russia & Nato got invasion plans for plenty of countries. I read articles (or in that case just their headlines because I thought of them to be absurd) that Russia had concrete plans for attacking Japan and Kazakhstan and what not, and likewise I read these kinda claims from the other side.
But as far as I am concerned these sorts of articles only exist to lure you towards a side and or make quick cash by spreading havoc and hate.
In any case I might call it a day. I need to get some stuff done. Was a nice debate tho. Might reply tomorrow if there’s anything else. Stay safe & healthy my lemmygrader comrades haha.
What exactly is the problem with 14. this is how it should be. After all, borders shouldn’t be recognised for nothing you know.
They specifically mention Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova. They could’ve said they reiterate the territorial integrity and sovereignty of any country, or of any European country, whatever. But they specifically listed these countries which they have a massive influence on. So it’s a sign there was something going on there.
But on the other hand, why would you so desperately hold on to something that apparently wasn’t even worth making a REAL treaty for.
A treaty is certainly more concrete, and I agree with you. What’s important about this exchange is that the Russians made it clear they found NATO expansion threatening since the 90’s and every time it expanded it was thoroughly and systematically condemned by Russian authorities. NATO continued expanding nonetheless, warning after warning. NATO was looking for war, and pushing Eastern European countries towards war with Russia.
And on the other Hand, Russia hasn’t been that innocent either with a habit of solving disagreements with especially Georgia & Ukraine by using deterrence and the sledgehammer.
But (at least for me) that still does not justify the means.
Certainly. The idea is not to justify the war, but to understand it in context. These were countries which were under Russian influence for at least a century and only recently weaponized to struggle against Russia. This does not exempt Russia, obviously, though context is always necessary.
Regarding your last claim: do you have any evidence to back that up?
Unfortunately, I don’t have access to Ukrainian internal military documents, I can only attest it through indirect evidence. First, since the 2014 Euromaidan coup, Ukraine has been adopting an anti-Russian rhetoric and accepted neo-Nazi batallions (Azov, Pravy Sektor) into their army. This form of Nazism was against Russians specifically, treating them as subhumans. Also since 2014, these neo-Nazi militias has constantly harassed ethnically Russian people inside Ukraine on the Donbass region.
The Ukrainian government adopted textbooks in schools which taught children to hate Russia, see some evidence of this in this article by Sputnik (it’s a Russian source, but there are exceptional journalists from dozens of countries there). Here is an anti-Russian Ukrainian propaganda video being shown in a classroom way before the war, to illustrate this point.
This article by the Tricontinental directly responds to your question, too. It mentions how Ukraine military increased its spending by 500% from 2014–2019 and received military equipment from the West, along with military trainining, exercises and drills with NATO troops.
More indirect evidence includes this article from RAND Corporation, which is a very influential think-tank which serves as an advisor to the Pentagon. The article discusses strategies to “stress” the Russian economy, through exploiting its vulnerabilities and prompting a “costly Russian response.” Among the geopolitical measures suggested, there is:
Providing lethal aid to Ukraine would exploit Russia’s greatest point of external vulnerability. But any increase in U.S. military arms and advice to Ukraine would need to be carefully calibrated to increase the costs to Russia of sustaining its existing commitment without provoking a much wider conflict in which Russia, by reason of proximity, would have significant advantages.
Increasing U.S. forces in Europe, increasing European NATO member ground capabilities, and deploying a large number of NATO forces on the Russian border would likely have only limited effects on extending Russia. All the options would enhance deterrence, but the risks vary. A general increase in NATO ground force capabilities in Europe—including closing European NATO member readiness gaps and increasing the number of U.S. forces stationed in traditional locations in Western Europe—would have limited risks. But large-scale deployments on Russia’s borders would increase the risk of conflict with Russia, particularly if perceived as challenging Russia’s position in eastern Ukraine, Belarus, or the Caucasus.
At least for me, it shows the US military leadership was researching ways to actively provoke and cause a response from Russia so it hurts their economy. And since the US also had a finger in the Euromaidan coup of 2014, it’s very clear that the US was using Ukraine as an agent of a proxy war to affect the Russian economy for years before the Russian invasion.
II hear this constantly, I have yet to see it one time ever by ANY communists on ANY website.
Visit a few Ukraine threads, it’s one of the topics the fanatics pile on.
My point was that tankies are a “special” subset of communists.I have. I’ve still never seen it. What I do constantly see in those threads is dehumanization of Russian people and calls for mass genocide of them, though. Calling them orcs and talking about how they all deserve to die.
I don’t believe you, to be honest. One can acknowledge Russian security concerns (like multiple U.S. military officials and many high members of the UN have) without praising Putin. And I’ve still never seen a single communist say anything good about Putin. On any website.
What I do constantly see in those threads is dehumanization of Russian people and calls for mass genocide of them, though. Calling them orcs and talking about how they all deserve to die.
In Lemmygrad? Please link us any comment made by a Lemmygrad user which corresponds to what you just described. This seems absurd.
No, I see those in Ukraine threads, not specifically on Lemmygrad. Actually, I see it most on lemmy world, overall. Sorry, I should’ve articulated that more clearly.
I’ve never seen what you’re describing. Not about Russians anyway. I’ve seen far too many zionists saying that shit about Palestinians tho.
I’m glad for your sake. It’s pretty gross.
People who throw the word “tankie” around indiscriminately aren’t using it right. From what I’ve seen, it applies specifically to extreme communist fanboys who are apologists for communist militarism. For example, Tankies will say that the Tiananmen Square massacre was either justified or didn’t happen.
Just being a fan of communism doesn’t make someone a tankie.
Edit: see below for an excellent example
People who throw the word “tankie” around indiscriminately aren’t using it right
There’s no right way to use it, because it’s a completely meaningless term which only serves to discriminate and isolate those who support more radical views, such as a defense of revolution against capitalist dictatorship.
it applies specifically to extreme communist fanboys who are apologists for communist militarism
There are “military apologists” among the conservative population which admires the Soviet Union because of its army. Are they tankies as well?
I see this as an aversion against violence in general, common among liberal “leftists”. Someone who is deserving of the label “communist” simply don’t reject violence as a way to fight against the capitalist system, which is already a very violent system. Communists do not support unjustified violence, but they simply don’t condemn it in a revolutionary process. All successful revolutions were a violent, brutal process, to defend an abstract non-violent revolution is simply falling into idealism and losing sight of reality and history.
Tankies will say that the Tiananmen Square massacre was either justified or didn’t happen.
As what liberal leftists would call a “Tankie”, the Tiananmen Square protests did in fact happen. What didn’t happen is the army gunning down on students and civilians. There is not a single footage of that happening. And even eyewitnesses of what happened there, like a Chilean diplomat whose cable has leaked in WikiLeaks for public view, they all say they didn’t see any army member shooting people. They saw hurt people, bleeding people, and even army soldiers being killed and burned down. A lot of people were hurt in the midst of the confusion of protests. But not a single army soldier shot a single student on that day.
What you don’t know about Tiananmen Square protests is that while some policies of the Communist Party of China generated a dissatisfaction among the younger population, the protests were largely financed and fueled by the UK and US, especially by the “National Endowment for Democracy”, an organization specialized in recruiting and training leaderships of mass protests, used for regime change operations through color revolutions.
deleted by creator
Thank you!
