this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2025
1 points (100.0% liked)

Memes

46399 readers
133 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
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] davel@lemmy.ml 0 points 14 minutes ago
[–] TheOakTree@lemm.ee 0 points 1 hour ago (2 children)

Tankie doesn't really mean anything to me anymore. Even self-proclaimed tankies often have trouble defining it in a way that is consistent among leftist groups.

[–] Z_Poster365@hexbear.net 0 points 18 minutes ago (1 children)

generally it vaguely means "communists" as well as "anti-imperialists", with the caveat that left communists are excluded as a separate thing

[–] 1rre@discuss.tchncs.de 0 points 13 minutes ago* (last edited 12 minutes ago)

I was under the impression it was the intersection of the venn diagram of communists and imperialists, as long as imperialist means imperialist and not just "western and capitalist"

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

A tankie is anyone to the left of whoever is using the pejorative. Usually because they expressed a critique of imperialism or aren't sufficiently racist towards the Chinese.

[–] TheOakTree@lemm.ee 0 points 57 minutes ago* (last edited 57 minutes ago) (2 children)

This seems to be how I see it used most. I usually stick to calling people tankies when they walk around explicitly talking about how proud they are to be one.

[–] Z_Poster365@hexbear.net 0 points 17 minutes ago

Yeah I'm a tankie

[–] DoiDoi@hexbear.net 0 points 50 minutes ago

Anyone you see self identifying as a tankie is just fucking around because of how meaningless the term is. If you want to insult a Marxist try directly engaging with whatever it is they're saying that annoys you. You might even learn something along the way.

[–] __nobodynowhere@lemm.ee 0 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

I'm not into that authoritarian stuff.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

Communism and fascism are entirely different, and conflating the two has roots in Double Genocide Theory, a form of Holocaust trivialization and Nazi Apologia. The Nazis industrialized murder and attempted to colonize the world, the Soviets uplifted the Proletariat and supported national liberation movements such as in Cuba, China, Algeria, and Palestine. I recommend reading Blackshirts and Reds.

[–] Demdaru@lemmy.world 0 points 53 minutes ago (1 children)

What in the everlasting embrace of god. Soviets, who - I'll admit - simply chose to work people to death painted as the good guys? The same soviets that starved, beaten and let people freeze to death? The same that put people in cattle wagons and rode them out to syberia in nothing more than clothes they had on their backs?

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] __nobodynowhere@lemm.ee 0 points 3 hours ago (2 children)

Not my fault people are conflating them

[–] Xavienth@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

It is, because "authoritarian" is a nebulous word not based on any actually reality, used to try to refer to both the USSR and Nazi Germany as if they are similar in any way.

[–] __nobodynowhere@lemm.ee 0 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (2 children)

Words don't have meanings!

China, Russia and the US are all authoritarian states and none of them are your friends.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

The term authoritarianism is utterly meaningless because all governments rely on coercion to maintain their authority. The state is fundamentally an instrument that's used by the ruling class to maintain its dominance. The whole notion that political systems can be neatly categorized into authoritarian or democratic binaries is deeply infantile.

The reality is that every government derives its authority from its monopoly on legal violence. The ability to enforce laws, suppress dissent, and maintain order is derived from control over police, military, and judicial systems. Whether a government is labelled authoritarian or democratic, the fundamental basis of its power lies here. Therefore, the only meaningful questions to ask are which class interests it represents, and to what extent can it be held accountable to them.

What ultimately matters is which class controls the institutions of state violence. In capitalist democracies, the government represent the interests of the economic elites who fund political campaigns, own media outlets, and control key industries. Western public lacks the mechanisms necessary to hold the government to account, and the ruling class is disconnected from the broader population. That's precisely what's driving political discontent all across western sphere today. Meanwhile, in so-called authoritarian regimes, the ruling party serves the working class as seen in countries like China, Cuba, or Vietnam. Hence why there is widespread public trust in these government and they enjoy broad support from the masses.

[–] __nobodynowhere@lemm.ee 0 points 40 minutes ago* (last edited 40 minutes ago) (2 children)

Meanwhile, in so-called authoritarian regimes, the ruling party serves the working class as seen in countries like China,

The fundamental disagreement lies here. The Chinese government does not serve the working class. Modern China is not a communist state and suffers the exact same problems the US suffers from.

[–] yogthos@lemmy.ml 0 points 32 minutes ago

The fundamental disagreement lies in your shameful ignorance of the subject you're attempting to provide opinions on. Modern China is a socialist state where the working class holds power, but capitalist relations have not yet been abolished. That's what socialism is, it's a transitional state between capitalism and communism.

90% of families in the country own their home giving China one of the highest home ownership rates in the world. What’s more is that 80% of these homes are owned outright, without mortgages or any other leans. https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2016/03/30/how-people-in-china-afford-their-outrageously-expensive-homes

Chinese household savings hit another record high in 2024 https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-today-dow-jones-bank-earnings-01-12-2024/card/chinese-household-savings-hit-another-record-high-xqyky00IsIe357rtJb4j

People in China enjoy high levels of social mobility https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/11/18/world/asia/china-social-mobility.html

The typical Chinese adult is now richer than the typical European adult https://www.businessinsider.com/typical-chinese-adult-now-richer-than-europeans-wealth-report-finds-2022-9

Real wage (i.e. the wage adjusted for the prices you pay) has gone up 4x in the past 25 years, more than any other country. This is staggering considering it's the most populous country on the planet. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cw8SvK0E5dI

The real (inflation-adjusted) incomes of the poorest half of the Chinese population increased by more than four hundred percent from 1978 to 2015, while real incomes of the poorest half of the US population actually declined during the same time period. https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w23119/w23119.pdf

From 1978 to 2000, the number of people in China living on under $1/day fell by 300 million, reversing a global trend of rising poverty that had lasted half a century (i.e. if China were excluded, the world’s total poverty population would have risen) https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/China%E2%80%99s-Economic-Growth-and-Poverty-Reduction-Angang-Linlin/c883fc7496aa1b920b05dc2546b880f54b9c77a4

From 2010 to 2019 (the most recent period for which uninterrupted data is available), the income of the poorest 20% in China increased even as a share of total income. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SI.DST.FRST.20?end=2019&amp%3Blocations=CN&amp%3Bstart=2008

By the end of 2020, extreme poverty, defined as living on under a threshold of around $2 per day, had been eliminated in China. According to the World Bank, the Chinese government had spent $700 billion on poverty alleviation since 2014. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/31/world/asia/china-poverty-xi-jinping.html

Over the past 40 years, the number of people in China with incomes below $1.90 per day – the International Poverty Line as defined by the World Bank to track global extreme poverty– has fallen by close to 800 million. With this, China has contributed close to three-quarters of the global reduction in the number of people living in extreme poverty. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2022/04/01/lifting-800-million-people-out-of-poverty-new-report-looks-at-lessons-from-china-s-experience

None of these things happen in capitalist states, and we can make a direct comparison with India which follows capitalist path of development. In fact, without China there practically would be no poverty reduction happening in the world.

If we take just one country, China, out of the global poverty equation, then even under the $1.90 poverty standard we find that the extreme poverty headcount is the exact same as it was in 1981.

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2019/07/5-myths-about-global-poverty

The $1.90/day (2011 PPP) line is not an adequate or in any way satisfactory level of consumption; it is explicitly an extreme measure. Some analysts suggest that around $7.40/day is the minimum necessary to achieve good nutrition and normal life expectancy, while others propose we use the US poverty line, which is $15.

https://www.cgdev.org/blog/12-things-we-can-agree-about-global-poverty

As a result, even as mainstream western media openly admits, Chinese government enjoys broad public trust and support:

[–] DoiDoi@hexbear.net 0 points 39 minutes ago* (last edited 38 minutes ago) (1 children)
[–] __nobodynowhere@lemm.ee 0 points 38 minutes ago (2 children)
[–] davel@lemmy.ml 0 points 21 minutes ago
[–] DoiDoi@hexbear.net 0 points 38 minutes ago* (last edited 37 minutes ago)

Actually read the essay instead of just snapping back lol. They have a fascinating system that is very unlike what you imagine.

[–] Xavienth@lemmygrad.ml 0 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

Everyone I Don't Like is Authoritarian: A Guide to Online Political Discourse

[–] __nobodynowhere@lemm.ee 0 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago) (1 children)

Big brain time

I did a le maymay on the Internet. I am le smarts.

You sure pwned me. I'll concede to your infinite intellect. I know when I'm bested.

[–] ShimmeringKoi@hexbear.net 0 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

I know when I'm bested.

This is not true

Can you name a single non-"authoritarian" state, please?

[–] DoiDoi@hexbear.net 0 points 1 hour ago

We're gonna do hands across america again, but this time we'll complete the damn chain and fascism will be DONEZO

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 hours ago

You conflated them, though. It may not be originally your fault, though, that dishonor goes to figures like Joseph Goebbels.

[–] glimmer_twin@hexbear.net 0 points 4 hours ago

Tank you very much

load more comments
view more: next ›