• Noughmad@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    108
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, you can call yourself a leftist all you want, but when 90% of your posts is calling Biden and Zelensky Nazis but you never criticize Putin or Trump, I get certain doubts.

  • BigNote@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    65
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, it’s so strange that people confuse you with a Kremlin bot when you repeatedly spew the same fucking bullshit talking points as the bots themselves.

    • RoundSparrow@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      When it comes to media attraction, what they call themselves (labels) don’t really matter that much. It’s the praise of strong men, authority, that crosses all mythological media systems. Be it bowing down to a burning bush story, Fox News, or Kremlin.

  • Echo71Niner@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    No one wants to talk about the thousands of extra bots that reddit released during the blackout and afterwards to keep up with the illusion. A whole lot of sub users on reddit are engaging with bots. In fact, some gullible people think r/place is run by users, and not the thousands of bots run by different subs, as well as reddit admins.

  • Snart@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    45
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Tankies when you don’t want your country to fall into fascism.

      • anarchrist@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean they said it was to ensure republican losses in the general elections, but the DNC financially supported many fascists in the republican primaries.

    • ox0r@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      For the majority of the world, the usa is alrwas inflicting fascism on them all the fucking time. Hell even people inside the usa live under a fascist state, especially minorities/poc

    • The dogspaw @midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Tankies want there country’s to fall to fascism though they claim to be on the left but fallow a right wing extremist in putin and spout rightwing talking points

      • Snart@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The only good reply to my comment. Get a tankie drunk and you’ll hear all you need to know they’re full of shit.

  • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    75
    arrow-down
    46
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    What’s the difference between a fascist and an “anarchist” who does everything they can to kneecap the only viable left leaning political party in the US?

    There’s no practical difference, just window dressing. They both cheer on oppression and pain for those suffering under Republicans.

    And don’t even get me started on communists. Left and right authoritarians, I’ve gotten death threats from both of them. Whether it’s some leftist telling me I would “get the wall” when the Revolution comes or some fucking Republican telling me that the US was only for Christians and that they’ll go after “traitors” soon, you get to the same fucking place at the end of the day. The only real difference is that there’s far more Republicans, and they’re far more organized than left authoritarians.

    • Dr. Jenkem@lemmy.blugatch.tube
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      arrow-down
      25
      ·
      1 year ago

      bOtH sIdEs

      This is why libs get clowned on so hard. You claim to support “the only viable left leaning political party”, and yet you’re kneecapping large swaths of people on the ground engaging in direct action advancing left leaning values. Remember, segregation wasn’t ended because black people voted, blood was spilt in the streets. Same with the LGBT community, see the stonewall uprising, aka, the first pride parade.

      I don’t care how you vote, but if you can’t see the difference between an anarchist engaging in direct action against an oppressive state and fascists doing hate crimes; well, I’d say it’s time to get off your high horse and do a little introspection.

      • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        36
        arrow-down
        20
        ·
        1 year ago

        yet you’re kneecapping large swaths of people on the ground engaging in direct action advancing left leaning values

        Direct action is meaningless if you’re hostile to building a coalition broad enough to actually gain any significant political power. It doesn’t matter how many lit memes anarchists and communists share on social media and how much they horn on about “direct action,” this is a democracy and without votes going to candidates who can win, it is ultimately meaningless.

        You want me to do some introspection? I did. I remember being young and convinced socialism was the way forward. Then I grew the fuck up and did some introspection.

        • Dr. Jenkem@lemmy.blugatch.tube
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          28
          arrow-down
          17
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Direct action is meaningless if you’re hostile to building a coalition broad enough to actually gain any significant political power.

          Spoken like someone who’s never done organizing, participated in protests or any other direct action. You’re a keyboard warrior who’s probably never even interacted with a socialist IRL.

          this is a democracy and without votes going to candidates who can win, it is ultimately meaningless.

          Not a democracy and also I already gave 2 examples showing the contrary.

          I remember being young and convinced socialism was the way forward. Then I grew the fuck up and did some introspection.

          No need to be a condescending dick. I’m also guessing I’m older than you, not that it’s relevant.

          • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            21
            arrow-down
            14
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’ve participated in dozens of protests. Protests with political organization can lead to change. Protests without political organization are just yelling at a wall.

            No need to be a condescending dick.

            If you don’t want someone to take offense at what you write, don’t smugly tell them to learn introspection. Act like an arrogant dick, get treated like an arrogant dick.

            • Dr. Jenkem@lemmy.blugatch.tube
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              21
              arrow-down
              9
              ·
              1 year ago

              Protests with political organization can lead to change. Protests without political organization are just yelling at a wall.

              Right… I’m not sure why you think I’m not in favor of organized resistance.

              If you don’t want someone to take offense at what you write, don’t smugly tell them to learn introspection. Act like an arrogant dick, get treated like an arrogant dick.

              You were doing a “both sides” between anarchists and fascists, eerily similar to Trump, while claiming to be “left leaning”. I think my response was warranted, if not understated. But frankly, that’s plain ignorant.

              • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                14
                ·
                1 year ago

                Like I said, attempting to degrade the only left leaning political coalition means someone is hostile to any sort of positive left leaning activism. If that doesn’t describe a given anarchist, then what I said doesn’t apply to them. If it does, then they might as well be a Trumpster.

                • Dr. Jenkem@lemmy.blugatch.tube
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  15
                  arrow-down
                  6
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Who or what is this sole “left leaning political coalition”? If you’re referring to Democrats they are neither left leaning nor a coalition. They are a center-right political party. Coalition implies multiple parties. And the Democratic party isn’t exactly known for activism, unless you’re counting fundraising events.

            • epicspongee [they/them or he/him]@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’ve participated in dozens of protests. Protests with political organization can lead to change. Protests without political organization are just yelling at a wall.

              Protests !== organizing. Organizing achieves political change. Protest does not. Leftists know how to organize, liberals do not.

              • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                If liberals don’t know how to organize and leftists do, why does the Democratic party dominate elections

                • Deme@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Liberals don’t know how to organize precisely because the Democratic party dominates the elections. No need to organize when the organization already exists. All they need to do is to “vote blue no matter who”.

          • socsa@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            This is unnecessary aggro, and you are the only one here making sweeping assumptions.

      • socsa@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        This is delusional. Direct action absolutely has its place, but all the things you mentioned were ultimately won at the ballot box. As it should be. Don’t let a childish revolution fetish blind you to what constitutes a viable framework for lasting progress.

        Edit - “Has.” As in he has a ball. Or she has a textbook.

        • Dr. Jenkem@lemmy.blugatch.tube
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s funny how libs think they can tell me when direct action is necessary, and it’s always in the past tense, never in the present.

            • Dr. Jenkem@lemmy.blugatch.tube
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              1 year ago

              Not an ML. And certainly don’t think I’m the only leftist. Lots of different types of leftists, many I disagree with. But unless you’re opposed to capitalism, then you’re a liberal, not a leftist.

            • Addfwyn@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I am a ML and everything I have seen of Jenkem’s posting here makes me think they are probably a leftist.

              We probably don’t agree on everything, but they’re no liberal.

    • LinkOpensChest.wav@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      Is your issue with anarchists or authoritarians? I somehow doubt that anarchists are sending you death threats. Nor do I see anarchists kneecapping the Democrats. Anarchists don’t want a state, though many do vote for the moderate right-wing (not “left leaning”) Democrats simply because they think it’s the right thing to do.

      Your sweeping generalizations and attempts to paint all of us with the same brush betray your own lack of knowledge, but don’t worry, I’m sure the planet will last long enough for the Democrats’ slow incremental change, and I’m sure my family in border camps are very thankful to be in liberal concentration camps.

    • Addfwyn@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      the only viable left leaning political party in the US?

      I might be misunderstanding you, so I apologize if that is the case, but if you are referring to the Democrats they are far from left leaning. They aren’t even center leaning.

      You can’t even say they have a better track record than the Republicans. They bomb countries as much (or in recent years even more) than the Republicans. They advocate for wars. They fund ICE even more than the Republicans. They stand up just as much for reproductive rights (read: not at all). They just do all of it while waving a rainbow flag.

      I really hope you meant the Greens or the CPUSA; which have their own issues but are certainly more left than either the Democrats or Republicans.

      • WldFyre@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Link to them bombing more than Republicans? And also several blue states have abortion rights and protections while the red states have none.

    • Rozaŭtuno@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This comment is giving me so much whiplash.

      I was sure it was gonna be ironic when they started comparing anarchists to fascists, but fun fact: no, they actually mean it. Anarchists are fascists, everyone. You’ve heard it here first!

      I swear, if there’s something liberals hate more than what’s on their right, it’s what’s on their left.

    • Takapapatapaka@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      An anarchist is fighting against military/police. A fascist belongs, or wants to, to military/police. An anarchist is fighting against people who hold some power. A fascist is fighting against people because of their religion or origins. An anarchist likes to vote and discuss. A fascist likes to follow orders. An anarchist tends towards decentralization. A fascist tends towards centralization.

      This are only some differences but spoiler alert : anarchist and fascist are not the same. They do not act the same way, they do not think the same way.

      I understand that you hate them both, it is your point of view, and it’s okay. But please, follow my advice : avoid trying to justify it with sentences as universal and strong as “There is no practical difference”, it makes the whole thing ridiculous.

      In the end, saying there is only “one viable […] party”, and even believing in a party itself, are also part of the problem imo. If you truly believe in this sentence, no wonder why you dislike anarchists and why they probably dislike you. But does it imply that either you or them are fascistic ? And if yes, did you considered that it could be you, who are defending a single “viable” party as the only solution, hating on every other option ?

      • FaeDrifter@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        His point was that “anarchist” was in quotes because they self-identify as an anarchist but behave in contradictory way.

        And I would say my experience with a few lemmy instances is exactly that. “I am an anarchist” is a way of creating group lines, consisting of the in-group of anarchists, and everyone else in the out-group (fascists and liberals together).

        It’s really silly because it’s an inherent contradiction. The point of being an anarchist is that there is no out-group, and yet they’ve just recreated the in-group out-group mentality all over again.

        • Takapapatapaka@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Oh, okay thank you for clarification. I agree with you, sectarianism is to me one of the biggest problem in far-left groups. But I still think that this is not enough imo to justify that “There is no practical difference” between them and fascists, even if restricted to their behavior on those communities. Anyway, i understand this comment better now, thank you <3

          • FaeDrifter@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Oh yeah, there’s a huge difference between tankies and fascists. Tankies are 10,000% better.

            Suppose my only two choices in a vote were between a tankie that punched me in the face and slept with my mother, and a fascist. I would not just vote for the tankie, I would also donate money, canvas for them, and tell all my friends to vote for them.

            I think it’s just an online problem, anybody who gets radicalized in an echo chamber loses the plot of their own cause. It’s just optics.

      • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        If an “anarchist” is trying to undermine any politician with a realistic chance of making office who is at all sympathetic to efforts at police reform, they’re not fighting the police, they’re fighting reform efforts.

      • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s why I am specifically criticizing people who spend all their time undermining the Democrats rather than trying to engage in real activism

    • epicspongee [they/them or he/him]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      What’s the difference between a fascist and an “anarchist” who does everything they can to kneecap the only viable left leaning political party in the US?

      Sorry which party is this? Dems are not even a remotely left-leaning party. Joe Biden literally criminalized the rail workers using their legal right to strike.

      This is also like a children’s picture book-level of understanding of fascism. As if the Dems’ policy of 4 more years of the status quo could prevent fascism at all. That has literally never worked as a way to combat fascism.

    • Rusty Shackleford@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      I will repeat this until the heat-death of the universe:

      Personal liberty and self-determination are assailed by many threats: the theocrats, nihilists, corporatists, fascists, and so-called “collectivists”. They all claim to be the true authoritative “voice of the people”.

      Extreme authoritarian “leftists”, A.K.A. “tankies” (i.e., apologists for Lenin, Stalin, Mao, the CCP, the DPRK, Fidel Castro, Che Guevara, Xi Jingping, etc.), are threats to a free, egalitarian, and open society, are just as violently authoritarian as their religious, corporatist, and fascist competitors, and should be treated with the contempt, distrust, and ridicule they deserve.

      They claim to speak and fight for the proletariat, promising a new utopia, never before seen, once their revolution executes the last “class-traitor”. In practice, once they’re finished with “seizing the means of production”, they’ll never relinquish control and become the new ruling class. Beware of their cults. Understand what they really are; power over everything and everyone, forever, is what they seek. They want you either as a true believer (a willing pawn) or dead, just like all of the other supposedly benevolent dictators who promised utopias throughout history.

      They’ll assume the mantle of an enlightened elite post-revolutionary administration to guide the proletariat to their promised utopia of “each according to their ability, to each according to their need”. In practice, "the party leadership needs the most, because they’re obviously the most able” in reorganizing the economic and political structure of society. The utopia of the “dictatorship of the proletariat” will never exist, only the dictatorship of the “revolutionary party”. Repression and execution await those who question their claims and decisions. These supposed champions of labor are really harbingers of death - of the mind and the body politic.

      They’re akin to the pigs in Orwell’s Animal Farm, the loudest voices in the revolution, usurpers of a righteous cause, but a bit “more equal” than everyone else after the farmer is done away with. Fortunately, the pigs, like the farmer, got their comeuppance in the end of the story.

      Make these pigs squeal.

    • Veraxus@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Left is literally the opposite of authoritarian. You seem to be conflating a whole lot of ideas and terminology here. You sound like an ideological leftist who has been confused by the right’s deliberate language-muddying.

      Left is egalitarian. That takes many different forms: socialism, communism, direct democracy, anarchism, etc.
      Right is authoritarian. That also takes many different forms: monarchy, feudalism, oligarchy, corporatism, etc.

      Authoritarianism (or vertical/hierarchical power structure) is THE defining characteristic of the right. “Auth-left” is Doublethink; an oxymoron meant to distract from the fact that wealth and power are one and the same.

      • CheezyWeezle@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        State-imposed collectivism is left-leaning authoritarianism. It is the authoritarian and non-voluntary implementation of leftist economic policy. It is an extremely simple concept that I cant fathom how you aren’t able to grasp.

        • Veraxus@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          17
          ·
          1 year ago

          This is very easy. I provided the definitions of left and right.

          Think about what you mean by “the state”. Which definition does it fit?

          • CheezyWeezle@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            15
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Um, “the state” is whatever the government is. Are you actually suggesting that True Anarchy is the only leftist organizational structure that can fit the definition of “Leftist”? Because that’s what you are alluding to.

            Also, you absolutely did not provide the “definitions of left and right”. These definitions aren’t even universally agreed upon. I am assuming you mean “Liberalism and Conservatism” when you say “left and right”, and it is just untrue that Liberalism is incompatible with authoritarianism, and it is equally untrue that conservatism must be accompanied by authoritarianism. For example, Libertarianism is a patently right-leaning ideology that completely rejects authoritarianism. At the same time, communism is state-imposed redistribution of economic means; that is 100% undeniably a left-leaning ideology that accepts and implements authoritarianism.

            • Veraxus@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Are you actually suggesting that True Anarchy is the only leftist organizational structure that can fit the definition of “Leftist”?

              I provided specific examples, as well as clear, concise definitions.

              Also, you absolutely did not provide the “definitions of left and right”. These definitions aren’t even universally agreed upon.

              You can brush up on the origins and meaning of the left-right spectrum here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left%E2%80%93right_political_spectrum

              I am assuming you mean “Liberalism and Conservatism” when you say “left and right”

              I do not, because those are not the same thing in the same way buttered toast is not a pizza. Liberalism is “centrist”. It appears egalitarian at first glance, but if focuses heavily (if not entirely) on means rather than ends, allowing for (and even encouraging) consolidation of wealth & power; that is: rightward drift. “Conservatism” is a relative term, not an absolute.

              Libertarianism is a patently right-leaning ideology that completely rejects authoritarianism.

              Libertarianism’s origins are leftist/anarchist, but the term itself has recently been co-opted by rightists and liberals the same way authoritarians always always co-opt leftist terms.

              communism is state-imposed redistribution of economic means; that is 100% undeniably a left-leaning ideology that accepts and implements authoritarianism.

              That is not the definition of communism. Regardless of what you think about Marxist concepts themselves (or their feasibility) Marxism/Communism requires the “withering away of the state.” So long as there is entrenched leadership, that society is not leftist in the same way the Nazis were not socialist, and Republicans are not “pro-life”. And yes, that means the USSR was right wing, not left. At no point did the USSR meet the criteria or definition of communism. The definitions lead to the label, not the other way around.

              • be_excellent_to_each_other@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Regardless of what you think about Marxist concepts themselves (or their feasibility) Marxism/Communism requires the “withering away of the state.” So long as there is entrenched leadership, that society is not leftist in the same way the Nazis were not socialist, and Republicans are not “pro-life”. And yes, that means the USSR was right wing, not left. At no point did the USSR meet the criteria or definition of communism. The definitions lead to the label, not the other way around.

                I have disagreed with almost everything you have said, and am likely a member of the group you are railing against in this discussion. However, IMO you are spot on here.

                • Veraxus@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Thank you for that. Keep this in mind though: I’m just saying the same thing over and over in different ways each time.

                  “Auth-left” is just another kind of “both-siding”. It’s rightists claiming that other rightists are actually leftists so that the masses will be too afraid to consider actual leftist proposals seriously.

                  Leftist/egalitarian systems tend to be inherently unstable because of the existence of human greed. Greed will always lead to certain people trying, and succeeding, to hoard wealth and power for themselves. I refer to this as “rightward pressure”. The trick is pushing the dial as far left as possible while ensuring it remains stable and preventing rightward drift.

                  Lenin and other revolutionaries recognized this catch a long time ago, and so tried to justify “temporary tyranny” as a means to establish a leftist ends. Lenin didn’t have a lot of success with that in life; then upon Lenin’s death, Stalin seized power and never let it go… meaning that for all the suffering and bloodshed, Lenin and his Bolsheviks merely traded one right wing dictator/Tzar for another. Same story in China… And North Korea… And Cuba…

                  On the flip-side you have liberalism; which are leftist means that deliberately ignores “rightward pressure”, eventually resulting in rightist ends… as wealth and power accumulate and snowball for a few at the expense of the many (e.g. “late stage capitalism”).

                  So the question is: given that people are selfish and greedy, and any rightward movement cannot be safely considered temporary; how do we reach leftist ends while using only leftist means?

                  My personal stance? Democracy. We use Democracy to bolster Democracy a bit at a time… and the first thing we need to do to make that possible in implement a very aggressive progressive taxation system that caps how much wealth (and therefore power) any one individual or entity can control. Until we can fix that one thing, the politicians will continue to control the public instead of the other way around. That is the essence of leftism.

          • socsa@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            No, you provided head canon which would get you a failing grade in a freshman political science course.

      • tron@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Authoritarianism (or vertical/hierarchical power structure) is THE defining characteristic of the right. “Auth-left” is Doublethink; an oxymoron meant to distract from the fact that wealth and power are one and the same.

        This is so incredibly naive. Stalin? Mao? Evil authoritarianism comes in all flavors left and right. If you truly believe leftists aren’t capable of evil you need to study more history.

          • socsa@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            MLs and having a cringeworthy enlightenment complex - name a more iconic duo.

            • Veraxus@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Not a Marxist, but I won’t tolerate deliberately lying about terminology or muddying language. That’s a bad faith authoritarian/rightist tactic and I won’t let it slide.

      • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 year ago

        Authoritarianism is literally a defining feature of communism. Redefining terms to escape the reality of what ideologies look like when implemented is just dishonest.

        • Veraxus@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Communism literally - by Marx and Engel’s own definition - requires the “withering away of the state”. As the creators and originators of the very concept of “communism”, can you name one society that has met their criteria or achieved the goals laid out in their definition?

          • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            8
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes, I understand that Marx and Engels did not have realistic political ideals and that every attempt to implement their ideology has diverged from their utopian vision into authoritarianism when reality hits that ideology. That’s the point.

            • epicspongee [they/them or he/him]@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yes, I understand that Marx and Engels did not have realistic political ideals

              Have you read any of Marx? I’m not an ML but if you even glance at Capital you can tell that Marx’s whole schtick was using science to come up with realistic political ideals.

            • Veraxus@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              I see you moved the goal post to a different field.

              If you want to criticize the specifics of Marx/Engels proposals, that is very different than - whether by ignorance or malice - outright lying about them.

                • Veraxus@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I didn’t say anything about Marx or Engels. I talked about communism.

                  Oh dear. 🤦🏽

    • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      What’s the difference between a fascist, a democrat, and a Republican? At least the fascist makes the trains run on time while he’s running concentration camps and murdering minorities in the streets.

        • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Oh so Title 42 didn’t expand under Biden, and the concentration camps haven’t grown multiple-fold in the last few years? They didn’t put literally record breaking funding into the very police forces that have been proven definitively not only to NOT reduce crime, but to systematically oppress the poor and minorities? The democrats pulled out of all of our foreign invasions and curtailed military industrial spending, closing bases around the world and bringing troops home? They stopped the absurd sanctions regimes intended to specifically starve civilians in many countries around the world?

          I guess when you’re a middle class American, you have the luxury of not caring about the explicitly fascist behavior of thecUS government. Those of us in minority groups and the lower classes, and even more so those of us not in the US, don’t have that luxury. US fascism is maintained by force both internally and externally.

          • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            The Biden administration ended title 42, kid. And police forces do reduce crime. What’s needed is to get accountability for bad cops and to reform training, not neuter the justice system.

            You’re such an arrogant dick in your ignorance.

            • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Police forces don’t reduce crime, and it’s laughable that anyone could still think so after this many years of empirical data showing that increasing police presence and funding is not correlated with a decrease in criminality. Improving economic conditions for lower classes, however, is correlated with reduction in criminality.

              Biden admin didn’t end title 42, they ended the pandemic which prevented them from continuing the policy, and so now they’ve gone back to Trump Era policy of refusal at the border for anyone who came through another country along the way, a definitive violation of international refugee laws.

              • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Yes, police forces do reduce crime. That’s long been established in social science. I don’t care what your ideology is, if you’re denying reality, then I don’t know what the point of having a conversation with you is.

                And I’m glad you admitted that the Biden administration ended Title 42.

                • BartsBigBugBag@lemmy.tf
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Lmao. Still nothing on the concentration camps, nor their expansion under Biden, nor the illegal use of Trumps pre-covid policy, and nothing but apologia for Biden using title 42 for 2 full years to deport well over a million refugees.

                  If it were the case that more police means less crime, crime rates around the country would be at record low rates after the billions of dollars pumped into law enforcement by the federal government. Not to mention that the average city spends between 30-60% of its entire yearly budget on police forces. Is your belief that if they increase that to 70%, 80%, 100%, it will reduce crime? Do you not realize funding is indeed a zero sum game, and that putting more money into police necessarily means putting less money into social programs that have shown actual efficacy in reducing criminality?

    • timicin@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      What’s the difference between a fascist and an “anarchist” who does everything they can to kneecap the only viable left leaning political party in the US?

      what’s the difference between a cuckold and someone who votes for racist, homophobic, classicist establishment politicians no matter what; there is no difference.

      • Cleverdawny@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        16
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        Whatever lies you have to tell to make sure America gets worse, I guess. No honest, thinking human being could think there is no difference between Democrats and Republicans. That’s how we all know people like you are either useful idiots or just cosplaying Republicans.

  • Empricorn@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Don’t let perfect be the enemy of good. Bad is the enemy of good, and right-wingers are bad.

    • krolden@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      19
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If you always vote for the lesser of two evils, you end up with the worst evil imaginable.

      i accidentally deleted my comment ahhhhhhhhh sorry for double ping

      • Lightor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Could you explain this?

        If I have a truly evil person, say a Hitler like figure. Then I have a guy who is kind of an idiot. How does voting for the slight idiot end up way worse than a guy who wants to commit genocide. The slight idiot becomes the worst evil imaginable, but how?

    • krolden@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      If you always vote for the lesser of two evils, you end up with the worst evil imaginable.

      • Asafum@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        But we only ever have 2 evils. There is no “other” to choose. The old folks make sure of that during primaries, they vote and they choose people who look like them and are their age, so we always end up with the 2 worst choices.

          • Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            The right loves anti-electoralism on the left, it means that they have less of a fight from the left.

            Can you imagine how bad things would be if people didn’t vote if they felt like they were picking between the lesser of 2 evils?

            This nation would look a whole hell of a lot like modern Florida with it’s politics because Republicans in general turn out way more often than anyone else to vote.

            • krolden@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              7
              ·
              1 year ago

              Then why have things been getting so much worse over the past 50 years even with plenty of blue boys and gals getting put in office?

              • Lightor@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Ummm because nuance is a thing that exists. Global conditions, etc. I mean the guy in power during the pandemic saying we should inject bleach or nuke incoming hurricanes sure as shit helped things be worse.

              • Gormadt@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                What about the good that has happened?

                Do you think gay marriage would have been protected?

                Access to birth control secured?

                Anti-sodomy laws getting struck down?

                The Affordable Care Act passing?

                Disability rights?

                Do you think any of those things would have happened if Republicans been able to seize power and hold it unopposed over the last 50 years? No. None of those things would have happened. Those things happened because people further left than them got elected, the lesser of 2 evils won some elections.

                Don’t let perfect be the enemy of better.

              • AnarchoYeasty@beehaw.org
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Because Republicans? We’ve not had plenty of blues elected. We’ve seen abysmal showings from the left and republicans being elected across the nation who are setting out to destroy people’s rights.

  • Gnubyte@lemdit.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    Honestly it’s exhausting to the whole lemmy experience that every time something gets even slightly political, there’s an extreme communist in the comments pushing their agenda.

    I can literally say “hey man they all suck yo fuck politics am I right?” And in comes a guy who tells me I’m a Republican or Democrat or fuck America, whatever. I can even agree that the news is biased in America, and I’ll still get the same response.

    It makes conversations for the average consumer on the platform unproductive at best, unsettling in its worst form.

    • Leate Woncelsace@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m convinced everyone from h*xbear is a bot. (censored b/c I don’t want any of those fuckers noticing).

    • bric@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      For me it’s just the fact that people have delved so deep into their echo chambers that they’ve lost all sense of what regular people think. Like I’m fine with someone being an extreme communist, they can have that opinion, but it seems like a lot of people on here talk to other extreme communists so much that they think more nuanced communists are somehow right wing. It doesn’t matter how much you try to concede to acknowledge their viewpoint, their personal Overton windows have shifted so far that they exclude everyone but people exactly like them, and it just makes conversations impossible.

  • areyouevenreal@lemmy.antemeridiem.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    1 year ago

    What exactly is a liberal in this context? Is a social democrat a liberal? What about Jeremy Corbyn or Bernie Sanders?

    Why are people hating on “liberals” more than conservatives?

    • Count Zero@lemmy.villa-straylight.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      20
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is why. Well, this is one of the reasons.

      First, we have extremely few liberals in America. The Democratic party is mostly made up of people that would be best described as center-right anywhere else in the world. They don’t actually want to fight to roll back changes that Republicans make, and actually try to internally sabotage the few members that do want to undo changes the republicans make. They actively prevent change, and then active work against those who do want change all while professing to want change and to do their best to fight for it. But they’re lying, and people are catching on. People are even starting to realize that the whole “We’d do stuff for you if it wasn’t for that bad bad manchin, and Sinema” thing is as much of a lie, too.

      The second reason that is more for the communists is something along the lines of the old joke “Scratch a liberal, and a fascist bleeds” Communists don’t like liberals (And the use of the word liberal is pretty different from the usage in the first case) because they view them as people that profess to want these better for others, until it requires any, even minor, amounts of sacrifice from the liberal. The whole Moderate Rebels thing in Syria? It was always a lie for one simple reason. Fighting is an extreme action. Moderates don’t fight, they just don’t. That’s one of the reasons they’re moderates. Liberals are like communists that aren’t willing to fight or do what is necessary to enact change.

      • Asafum@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        I mean all the people arrested and rioting would disagree, but I imagine you’re more talking about our “liberal” politicians? In that case I would agree.

        We have corporate shills that wave a Rainbow flag and we have corporate shills that wave a Confederate flag. Then we have like maybe 3 oddballs in all of government that might actually care about people.

        • Count Zero@lemmy.villa-straylight.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Fucking Alan Dershowitz calls himself a liberal.

          Does that mean he is?

          No.

          Nor was he ever, even when he was considered in the in-group with liberals. He’s always been a right wing crank.

          What you call yourself is not a useful description of the political philosophy you hold. It just describes which tribe you consider your own, for most people.

        • Deme@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          A problem of definitions. The word ‘liberal’ has a whole bunch of meanings depending on who you ask. Someone farther on the left usually uses the term to describe people who claim to support freedoms and rights for everyone, but only as long as they themselves don’t have to sacrifice a thing. People who go out to riot and get arrested for it definitely fall outside of that group.

    • abraxas@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      In the United States, we refer to anyone in the Democratic party as “liberals”. Many people refer to Bernie Sanders as “liberal”. It’s kinda dumb, but easy to get caught in when you live in it.

    • anachronist@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is overlap especially when you don’t confuse communism as the broader framework with state communism or even worse soviet communism.

    • 🇰 🌀 🇱 🇦 🇳 🇦 🇰 ℹ️@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      There is still overlap in the societal aspects, just not the governmental aspects. Mostly because anarchy has no government. That’s the point. People can still choose to work together and basically create a communist society, without any enforcement from a government. Unlikely, but it’s not impossible.

    • explodicle@local106.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Do you think pro-Trump Russian bots are building up anarchist/communist post histories to throw you off? Or that anarchists/communists are de facto Trump supporters by not voting blue no matter who?

      • FaeDrifter@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        27
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I don’t go through people’s comment histories to try to validate them.

        And there’s a shocking overlap in vernacular and memes between tankies and alt-right. Obviously they’re diametrically opposed on almost all issues. BUT neither really believe in good faith discussion, it’s mostly trolling and “dunking”. Mix in sarcasm that’s not obvious to an outsider, and the jokes are hard to tell apart from misinformation or “muddying the water”.

        It’s way more present since Hexbear federated in, every first impression is that it’s an alt-right troll farm. After some interaction it gets clear quickly that it isn’t.

        Just expect us normies to have that first impression.

        • epicspongee [they/them or he/him]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          1 year ago

          BUT neither really believe in good faith discussion, it’s mostly trolling and “dunking”.

          I do not like tankies but I have absolutely never experienced this, all tankies typically want to do is discuss theory and history to the point that it’s exhausting. Have you talked to any Trotskyists??

          It’s way more present since Hexbear federated in, every first impression is that it’s an alt-right troll farm.

          I literally never got this impression, it’s like extraordinarily clear that Hexbear is a leftist instance. From the pronouns in names to the leftist jokes lol.

          • FaeDrifter@midwest.social
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            The double sets of pronouns and neopronouns, at first glance, made it look like a satire of gender inclusivity to me.

            And after some experience with them it’s clear that it isn’t satire, and they highly value gender inclusivity. My opinion now is that the apparent absurdity is a loyalty test. If you think fae/faer pronouns are silly, you aren’t an “ally” and you are immediately identified as out-group. And the out-group, transpobes, liberals, fascists, all get lumped together so much they can’t distinguish between them.

            It’s pretty much exactly what the right wing does. They can’t distinguish between liberals, leftists, tankies, or anarchists, because it’s all just “the enemy” to them.

            I do not like tankies but I have absolutely never experienced this, all tankies typically want to do is discuss theory and history to the point that it’s exhausting. Have you talked to any Trotskyists??

            I have almost no experience with tankies tbh, so I’ll be the first to say my opinions of them comes mostly from ignorance.

            But so far I’ve heard that a “nuanced understanding of geopolitics and history” means you think “NATO made Putin do it”.

            • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              … Which is causing people to associate pronouns with “tankie”, making the rest of us non-binary and gender fluid folk look bad in the eyes of others, and we don’t need to be stereotyped or negatively associated with anything right now. Or to have tankies speak or act for us. None of us asked for them to exploit us to make a statement and the fact that they’re using us for cheap propaganda points is something other people need to start calling them on.

              Watch one of those stupid motherfuckers cut in with “Think about that for a good five seconds” as if I’m not genderfluid myself and don’t see through what they’re doing. Watch them do it

              • FaeDrifter@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Look at that, you took two unrelated parts and stripped out all of the context.

                That’s what we call bad-faith trolling.

                Tankies can be ideologically diametrically opposed to alt-right fascists, yet use the same techniques. For example, they both love bad-faith trolling.

          • Noughmad@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’re thinking of communists or socialists. They are the ones who talk about theory and praxis.

            Tankies are the “the cruelty is the point” gang - don’t care about theory, workers rights, or anything else, and only use it to justify wars.

          • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            ^^ This guy is a tankie. The fact he’s using the term Trotskyists unironically proves this. Literally no one else except tankies does this.

            • epicspongee [they/them or he/him]@midwest.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              LMAOOO WHAT?? I’m just using the term they use for themselves.

              I ran into a group of Trotskyists once and it turned out they were absurdly boring and wanted me to grab coffee with them for weeks on end before they’d tell me anything, and they apparently read a metric fuckton of theory. So now I know the word Trotskyist. But I guess that makes me a tankie 🤷

              • LiberalSoCalist@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                you use a real word

                correctly use the historically/globally understood meanings of words

                “mm no that’s made up tankie nonesense”

                This is at least the fourth time I’ve seen lemmitors do this. Righteously indignant about not knowing things.

              • pinkdrunkenelephants@sopuli.xyz
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                7
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                No, you’re a tankie. Even in that context normal people never actually use that word. I can sit here and make up bullshit stories too, doesn’t change what you are.

                And stop brigading other instances. Go outside and touch grass

      • lolcatnip@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        You seem to be under the impression that my beef with Russian trolls is their lack of sincerity. It’s not. If you act like a Russian troll, it makes no difference to me whether you’re being sincere.

    • TimewornTraveler@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      i dont, im so fucking tired of it already and it isnt even a US election year

      edit: wow what a surprise, out of my inbox, the only two msgs with people bitching at me are the replies in an inherently inflammatory political post. in response to a fairly innocuous comment too! this kind of bullshit is bad for the brain

      • OprahsedCreature@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think the level of passion people feel about this is roughly equivalent to the level of gaslighting they’ve experienced by people who can’t fathom people to their left that they consider inferior not falling in line with their privileged positions

  • Potato_in_my_anus@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    Watching communists/socialists and conservatives/fascists arguing about whose ideology is better

    Grabs popcorn…