this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2025
4 points (83.3% liked)

Memes

47359 readers
1088 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)
  • and they both punch left; exactly as conservatives like to do.
[–] u_die_for_elmer@lemm.ee -1 points 1 month ago (11 children)

I consider tankies to be on the right end of the socialist spectrum, so when I say it I'm punching right. They're still comrades even if they are miss guided by state-capitalist governments. Cheers

[–] OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 month ago

I love it when people call a transitional economy state capitalist because it betrays a lack of understanding of actual capitalism and the role the state plays in it.

[–] SlayGuevara@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Lemmygrad admin here. I normally don't look at reports from other instances but for this I had to make an exception. Probably the dumbest shit I have read so far lmao.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

What did the report say? Lmao

[–] davel@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago

Reason: "state capitalist"

Hence my reply:

Because the Chinese state has fiat monetary sovereignty, it doesn’t function in the capitalist mode. It has no need to make a profit because it has infinite money[1]. It doesn’t need to extract surplus value from workers to satisfy investors, and it doesn’t even need to break even. The logic of capitalism doesn’t apply.

Ultras fear the scroll.

[–] ClathrateG@hexbear.net 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Do you believe there has ever been a socialist state, even one?

[–] u_die_for_elmer@lemm.ee 0 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Yes. Russia from 1917 till about 1928. A slow, but through counter revolution took place.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 0 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago)

I don't think I've run into someone that thinks the NEP was authentically Socialist, but the collectivized, publicly owned and planned economy that defined the Soviet Union for the majority of its existence as "counter-revolutionary." The NEP had more literal bourgeoisie and was defined by controlled markets, it's still a form of Socialism but it's common to deny it that along that basis. Are you a Bukharinist? Do those even exist? Even then, Bukharin seemed to just want to lengthen the NEP, not perpetuate it forever.

Genuinely, this is a take I haven't seen spelled out before. I don't agree, of course, but I'm curious what your reasoning is.

[–] ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

What defines your position on the spectrum?

[–] Z_Poster365@hexbear.net 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

lmao

anti-communism is always fascist. When you engage in "tankie punching" you engage in fascist anti-communism

[–] u_die_for_elmer@lemm.ee 0 points 4 weeks ago* (last edited 4 weeks ago) (1 children)

Sure. Never analyze or critique anything. Got U

[–] Z_Poster365@hexbear.net 0 points 4 weeks ago

How do you get from “never critique anything” to “I can be an anti-communist ideologue”?

[–] Horse@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 month ago

V I B E S B A S E D A N A L Y S I S

[–] o_d@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 1 month ago

Call it whatever the fuck you want. It's working 100 million times better than this shit we're doing. It's lead to the most rapid increase of quality of life in human history for it's people. Do you really think they care what you think about their government not being socialist enough?

Poverty is not socialism. To uphold socialism, a socialism that is to be superior to capitalism, it is imperative first and foremost to eliminate poverty.

[–] BrainInABox@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago

If you're one of those people who just considers "tankie" to be a synonym for "Marxist-leninist" then I suppose I agree, but I think the term is used too nebulously to meaningfully place on the political spectrum.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I think if you're comparing "degrees" of left vs right, at that point you're missing the forest for the trees. Ultimately, Anarchists and Marxists disagree on strategy and end goal, but both oppose Capitalism and Imperialism. At that point, there really isn't a "more" or "less" left, there's just differences in analysis and what must be done to get from A to B, as well as what B itself is.

[–] u_die_for_elmer@lemm.ee 0 points 4 weeks ago

Agreed. I'll come back to this when I'm not as busy. I made a simplistic argument and I'd like to expand on it. Cheers

[–] blame@hexbear.net 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] DoiDoi@hexbear.net 0 points 1 month ago

Personally I've found that bashing myself in the head with the book is just as effective as reading it

Cheerze

xok-og