Some leftists and others fall back on the old stereotype of powerhungry Reds who pursue power for powers sake without regard for actual social goals. If true, one wonders why, in country after country, these Reds side with the poor and powerless often at great risk and sacrifice to themselves, rather than reaping the rewards that come with serving the well-placed.
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.
…
Purging the Left of communists became a longstanding practice, having injurious effects on various progressive causes. For instance, in 1949 some twelve unions were ousted from the CIO because they had Reds in their leadership. The purge reduced CIO membership by some 1.7 million and seriously weakened its recruitment drives and political clout. In the late 1940s, to avoid being “smeared” as Reds, Americans for Democratic Action (ADA), a supposedly progressive group, became one of the most vocally anticommunist organizations.
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 ele¬ ments of society will be Red-baited by conservative elites whether they are communists or not. For ruling interests, it makes little dif¬ ference whether their wealth and power is challenged by “communist subversives” or “loyal American liberals.” All are lumped together as more or less equally abhorrent.
…
Sorely lacking within the U.S. Left is any rational evaluation of the Soviet Union, a nation that endured a protracted civil war and a multinational foreign invasion in the very first years of its existence, and that two decades later threw back and destroyed the Nazi beast at enormous cost to itself. In the three decades after the Bolshevik revolution, the Soviets made industrial advances equal to what capitalism took a century to accomplish — while feeding and schooling their children rather than working them fourteen hours a day as capitalist industrialists did and still do in many parts of the world. And the Soviet Union, along with Bulgaria, the German Democratic Republic, and Cuba, provided vital assistance to national liberation movements in countries around the world, including Nelson Mandelas African National Congress in South Africa.
Lol, the only socialist view you’ve ever espoused is hating other leftists. Now go back to defending the police, both-sidesing genocide, and shrieking about communists like a redscare boomer.
There is no list, just have to call them out.
Usually they disappear, as that is the prescribed MO as written in GCHQ/hasbara trolling handbook.
If they keep being annoying I can just block them.
Nah, tankies are people who defend uses of authority that liberals disagree with: you never see people being called tankies for defending the Nordic countries, even though they are undeniably authoritarian by any leftist definition.
Larping as a ‘socialist’, sing the internationale on the 1st of May while totally bootlicking US imperialism and (proxy) wars, supporting the genocide state and neoliberal policies/austerity measures at the expense of working class is OK.
That is every EU socialist/labour party.
Actually going against that is not acceptable, then you are indeed called a radical tankie.
Now we’re at the point where they want to equate communism with fascism, with the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact as BS excuse.
Blaming the soviets for causing WW2, etc. and more plain revisionism
Shamelessly pushed by those shitty Balt states that still can’t cope that the Soviets beat their nazi grandfathers.
You know by choosing to only answer to weak arguments. This make you suspect. And we already seen paid agent coming. If you not paid you probably got talking points for one and I am sorry you being manipulated :D
Yes, but I’m also a commie lol.
Socialist here: fuck tankies :D
Leftist infighting serves the capitalists
Yeah, but they’re not actually a leftist
There are no true scotsmen except me
Some leftists and others fall back on the old stereotype of powerhungry Reds who pursue power for powers sake without regard for actual social goals. If true, one wonders why, in country after country, these Reds side with the poor and powerless often at great risk and sacrifice to themselves, rather than reaping the rewards that come with serving the well-placed.
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.
…
Purging the Left of communists became a longstanding practice, having injurious effects on various progressive causes. For instance, in 1949 some twelve unions were ousted from the CIO because they had Reds in their leadership. The purge reduced CIO membership by some 1.7 million and seriously weakened its recruitment drives and political clout. In the late 1940s, to avoid being “smeared” as Reds, Americans for Democratic Action (ADA), a supposedly progressive group, became one of the most vocally anticommunist organizations.
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 ele¬ ments of society will be Red-baited by conservative elites whether they are communists or not. For ruling interests, it makes little dif¬ ference whether their wealth and power is challenged by “communist subversives” or “loyal American liberals.” All are lumped together as more or less equally abhorrent.
…
Sorely lacking within the U.S. Left is any rational evaluation of the Soviet Union, a nation that endured a protracted civil war and a multinational foreign invasion in the very first years of its existence, and that two decades later threw back and destroyed the Nazi beast at enormous cost to itself. In the three decades after the Bolshevik revolution, the Soviets made industrial advances equal to what capitalism took a century to accomplish — while feeding and schooling their children rather than working them fourteen hours a day as capitalist industrialists did and still do in many parts of the world. And the Soviet Union, along with Bulgaria, the German Democratic Republic, and Cuba, provided vital assistance to national liberation movements in countries around the world, including Nelson Mandelas African National Congress in South Africa.
Only if theyre cute enough to put up with their bullshit.
I can agree with that.
Lol, the only socialist view you’ve ever espoused is hating other leftists. Now go back to defending the police, both-sidesing genocide, and shrieking about communists like a redscare boomer.
Tankies are people who defend authoritarianism, so I don’t understand what you’re saying here.
Small world on lemmy, but Brain is a troll. Just check them out. All their history is derailing conversations and demoralizing leftist movements.
“I don’t understand” is sufficient.
Run along now traitor dumbfuck.
You’re the traitor and a larper.
Just come out as a fascist you coward POS with your 3 day old trolling account.
Your mom goes to college you Nazi fuck.
You spotted another paid troll to had to the list ?!
There is no list, just have to call them out.
Usually they disappear, as that is the prescribed MO as written in GCHQ/hasbara trolling handbook. If they keep being annoying I can just block them.
Nah, tankies are people who defend uses of authority that liberals disagree with: you never see people being called tankies for defending the Nordic countries, even though they are undeniably authoritarian by any leftist definition.
Not nah. It has nothing to do with liberal nonsense. Criticizing worthless dumbfuck traitor tankies is something leftists do.
Thanks for that perfectly circular argument.
If you don’t understand the terms circular and argument, I could definitely see how you’d think that.
fuck you then
And a very fuck you, too, comrade. :)
You’re nobody’s comrade.
Nazi supporters should keep that word out of their filthy mouths.
Fascist pig
projection, I feast on your tears
??? Support that accusation with any facts about me.
back to Hasan’s Twitch stream now please.
Back to supporting fascists for you then
Hasan is a tankie?
Everyone to the left of the Democratic Party is a tankie.
Larping as a ‘socialist’, sing the internationale on the 1st of May while totally bootlicking US imperialism and (proxy) wars, supporting the genocide state and neoliberal policies/austerity measures at the expense of working class is OK.
That is every EU socialist/labour party.
Actually going against that is not acceptable, then you are indeed called a radical tankie.
Now we’re at the point where they want to equate communism with fascism, with the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact as BS excuse.
Blaming the soviets for causing WW2, etc. and more plain revisionism Shamelessly pushed by those shitty Balt states that still can’t cope that the Soviets beat their nazi grandfathers.
Well said. Tankie is a term used by people who think The New Deal was peak socialism
lmao nice puppet account, just agreeing with yourself
Tankie Sanders lol
Sanders is a democrat, and thus represents the most left wing position that won’t (usually) get called tankie
No, Bernie is independent. Also I was just riffing on the similarity between bernie and tankie
For a paid agent you say some good things sometime, I guess a broken clock is right at least once a day
Yes yes, everyone you disagree with is secretly a paid agent.
You know by choosing to only answer to weak arguments. This make you suspect. And we already seen paid agent coming. If you not paid you probably got talking points for one and I am sorry you being manipulated :D