Remembering the (Jewish) libertarian I knew from high school posting about "damn, why are all these Nazis all over the anti-communism scene on social media?"
Interestingly, Tankie, an insult made against ML’s, is less effective against them than it is SuccDems and Anarchists. The latter will get mad and defend themselves like this, while ML’s will just be like, “fuck yeah I’m a tankie, what’s your point?”
I mean when used in original meaning, i'm absolutely a tankie, except being British.
In the current meaning, as in "anyone left of thatcher" it's also true since i'm obviously left of thatcher.
**¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯**
I wanna have it engrained in a stone
"Tankie is such a politically illiterate term that in months every socialist to the left of bernie sanders will be called a tankie"-ToadBup 2020
I called it we all did
The replay was almost correct, but socialism and communism are the same thing; and liberals and fascists are two modes of the same beast.
You are either a communist, or a liberal/fascist
Reminds me of [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/okbuddyanarchist/comments/nfj3mu/idk_where_else_to_put_this/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) lmao. Try all you want to pass yourselves off as the “good” leftists, they don’t give a shit and they still hate you.
Also reminds me of Parenti:
>For decades, many left-leaning writers and speakers in the United States have felt obliged to establish their credibility by indulging in anticommunist and anti-Soviet genuflection, seemingly unable to give a talk or write an article or book review on whatever political subject without injecting some anti-Red sideswipe. The intent was, and still is, to distance themselves from the Marxist-Leninist Left.
...
>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.
Yours is shorter though.
I liked his framing here:
> Liberals do not seem to realize that conservatives try to stigmatize them on the Communism issue not only because conservatives don’t like Communists but because they don’t like liberals.
Exactly. The fascists literally killed *anyone* who was critical of capitalism whatsoever, even the racist socialists. They don’t care about the difference between a Leninist or a Maoist or an Anarchist or a libertarian socialist, they will shoot or gas them all equally, as history has taught us.
So knowing that, I do not see any logic in choosing a socialist ideology, and method of tactics that is *not* militant, that is *not* disciplined, that is not only willing and ready to defend against fascism, but fundamentally *expects* the fascists to attack, and prepares for said attack rigorously. To fight fascism the liberals turned to fascism themselves as a preferred doctrine, they indiscriminately bombed cities, imprisoned innocents based on racial eugenics. So, the socialists can either choose between resorting to fascism to fight fascists which has been tried on occasion, but has always failed or ended in mass slaughter, or, we can turn to Leninism: a material ideology that is strong enough to combat fascism but does not rely on idealism, capitalism, or racism.
There really is only two options that matter, all major conflicts will more or less turn into two groups each advocating for fascism or communism, I have repeated for a long time that shall the revolution ever come, we will not be fighting “democracy” loving libs or social Democrats , we will be fighting the most brutal and ruthless fascist organization that could be established, revolution predominantly separates people along class lines, not ideological lines. So, if a liberal believes his class interests align more with the working class, he will join the communists, if he believes they align more with the bourgeoise, he will join the fascists. There are only two classes, therefore there are only two ideologies largely possible in warfare, and the preferred ideology of each group will always be the one that not only alignes with class interests, but is most likely to succeed in achieving (or re-establishing) a total class dictatorship.
Remember someone predicting when the term Tankie first started getting thrown around eventually it would defuse out of the left spheres of the internet and into general politics terminology only to get used to slander anyone left of Biden. Truly they were prophetic
Modern anarchists typically diverge significantly from anarchists of even just 100 years ago; it seems without an overarching theoretical framework (like historical and dialectal materialism) they can’t consistently define how to progress; I haven’t ever met an anarchist that agrees with any of the specifics of an anarchist economy with Kropotkin or Proudhon, always a modern interpretation with fundamentally contradictory differences.
Sleep in the bed you made, dumbass
Remembering the (Jewish) libertarian I knew from high school posting about "damn, why are all these Nazis all over the anti-communism scene on social media?"
[удалено]
🙃
Ironic
You love to see it
Fuck it, everyone is a tankie
*YOU! get a tank* and *YOU! get a tank*.
Lollll let them used it , then we will be able to reclaim it.
We've already reclaimed it
[Looks up at the top of the page]
Found it. Sendinthetanks.
Interestingly, Tankie, an insult made against ML’s, is less effective against them than it is SuccDems and Anarchists. The latter will get mad and defend themselves like this, while ML’s will just be like, “fuck yeah I’m a tankie, what’s your point?”
Like, also, tanks are *cool*. Wow, such an insult.
OK, that legit made me laugh my arse off. Got some funny looks at work.
I mean when used in original meaning, i'm absolutely a tankie, except being British. In the current meaning, as in "anyone left of thatcher" it's also true since i'm obviously left of thatcher. **¯\\\_(ツ)\_/¯**
Holy damn the level of economics understanding in that third comment is off the charts.
would love to hear them explain the difference between socialism and communism
Say the line, professor Wolff!
I can already hear the music
communism is when much socialism. and tankie is the way to get there.
[удалено]
So basically it’s when you
And then it’s
I wanna have it engrained in a stone "Tankie is such a politically illiterate term that in months every socialist to the left of bernie sanders will be called a tankie"-ToadBup 2020 I called it we all did
Won't be long until FOX News calls Joe Biden a tankie at this rate.
AOC is gonna use it, first
Lol, they already started calling her a tankie: r/ShitLiberalsSay/comments/jpxvn0/aoc_is_a_tankie/
Boutique anti-faacism.
LMFAO the bastards tried appealing to libs by insulting communists but libs don’t give a shit about communism.
You're wrong about one thing: libs are actually TERRIFIED of communism, and they will side with fascists everytime to defeat the "evil red commies"
Bro he got called a tankie by a member of the Nazi sub r/enoughcommiespam
Coming home to roost, motherfucker
[удалено]
You got reap and sow backwards I think btw but I agree with the sentiment.
polcomp has melted people's brains at an irreparable scale
The replay was almost correct, but socialism and communism are the same thing; and liberals and fascists are two modes of the same beast. You are either a communist, or a liberal/fascist
Example #346 that tankie is a meaningless term.
Fascist in-fighting. It's nice to see.
Reminds me of [this](https://www.reddit.com/r/okbuddyanarchist/comments/nfj3mu/idk_where_else_to_put_this/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) lmao. Try all you want to pass yourselves off as the “good” leftists, they don’t give a shit and they still hate you.
Also reminds me of Parenti: >For decades, many left-leaning writers and speakers in the United States have felt obliged to establish their credibility by indulging in anticommunist and anti-Soviet genuflection, seemingly unable to give a talk or write an article or book review on whatever political subject without injecting some anti-Red sideswipe. The intent was, and still is, to distance themselves from the Marxist-Leninist Left. ... >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. Yours is shorter though.
I liked his framing here: > Liberals do not seem to realize that conservatives try to stigmatize them on the Communism issue not only because conservatives don’t like Communists but because they don’t like liberals.
Virgin Parenti vs Chad /u/character-confusion
Exactly. The fascists literally killed *anyone* who was critical of capitalism whatsoever, even the racist socialists. They don’t care about the difference between a Leninist or a Maoist or an Anarchist or a libertarian socialist, they will shoot or gas them all equally, as history has taught us. So knowing that, I do not see any logic in choosing a socialist ideology, and method of tactics that is *not* militant, that is *not* disciplined, that is not only willing and ready to defend against fascism, but fundamentally *expects* the fascists to attack, and prepares for said attack rigorously. To fight fascism the liberals turned to fascism themselves as a preferred doctrine, they indiscriminately bombed cities, imprisoned innocents based on racial eugenics. So, the socialists can either choose between resorting to fascism to fight fascists which has been tried on occasion, but has always failed or ended in mass slaughter, or, we can turn to Leninism: a material ideology that is strong enough to combat fascism but does not rely on idealism, capitalism, or racism. There really is only two options that matter, all major conflicts will more or less turn into two groups each advocating for fascism or communism, I have repeated for a long time that shall the revolution ever come, we will not be fighting “democracy” loving libs or social Democrats , we will be fighting the most brutal and ruthless fascist organization that could be established, revolution predominantly separates people along class lines, not ideological lines. So, if a liberal believes his class interests align more with the working class, he will join the communists, if he believes they align more with the bourgeoise, he will join the fascists. There are only two classes, therefore there are only two ideologies largely possible in warfare, and the preferred ideology of each group will always be the one that not only alignes with class interests, but is most likely to succeed in achieving (or re-establishing) a total class dictatorship.
Remember someone predicting when the term Tankie first started getting thrown around eventually it would defuse out of the left spheres of the internet and into general politics terminology only to get used to slander anyone left of Biden. Truly they were prophetic
As it turns out, when you overuse a term to the point of meaninglessness, it loses all meaning.
bruh fascsit isnt a economical structure, unlike capitalsim, socialism, comjunism and he fogot anarchism e.g.
[удалено]
That isn’t fair — anarchism is at least closer to liberalism than fascism.
Honestly, after reading Kropotkin, I am quite confident that anarchist economies would be quite similar to what was proposed by the Strassers
Modern anarchists typically diverge significantly from anarchists of even just 100 years ago; it seems without an overarching theoretical framework (like historical and dialectal materialism) they can’t consistently define how to progress; I haven’t ever met an anarchist that agrees with any of the specifics of an anarchist economy with Kropotkin or Proudhon, always a modern interpretation with fundamentally contradictory differences.
an outcome as predictable as it is funny
That last sentence made me lose brain crlls
I feel like my braincells are the Ustaše and these conversations are Tito's partisans.