this post was submitted on 18 Aug 2023
211 points (97.7% liked)
196
16430 readers
2663 users here now
Be sure to follow the rule before you head out.
Rule: You must post before you leave.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I say I have to agree. Leftist infighting is cringe AF. Disagree w/ people all you want, but gatekeeping and name calling is just silly
I think it's reasonable to want to have a space that's free from people that defend authoritarian regimes. From my perspective, at least, 196 has always been a more anarchist-oriented space, and I think it makes sense to try to preserve that.
I'd also make the distinction that they are not banned from this forum, in the same way that libs are not banned from posting on their instance -- but those that post there are generally met with hostility, and that preserves the character of their space. I don't see why we shouldn't do the same.
Not to mention that this sub is unapologetically pro LGBT while practically every authoritarian government (including particularly those that tankies support) has been anti LGBT. eg, China prohibits same sex marriage and adoption, while forcing trans people to get permission from their family to transition (spoiler alert: they ain't progressive).
Democratic socialism with actual equality for all (which goes hand in hand with the root issue socialism is supposed to solve) makes sense and is reasonable. But that's not what tankies support. They're defined by support for authoritarian states that have nothing to do with equality except pretending that they care about it.
Or how LGBT relationships and "sissy-men" get censored out the wazzoo in popular Chinese Media and on social media.
Fun fact my mainland Chinese friends started saying "this humiliates China" without any other context on their social media because they weren't even allowed to say they were lonely during lock downs due to censors.
So should we who practice anarchism not be allowed because we don’t believe in Demsoc rhetoric? To me, most proposed demsoc systems would still be inherently authoritarian, as all states are. Especially by so empowering a state by giving it ownership of property instead of collective and direct control by the population.
Am I not allowed because I think electoral politics are inherently anti-democratic and states serve primarily to create and protect the rich from the poor?
Your appeal to democratic socialism as if it were common sense is concerning, because it reflects a lack of will to even entertain other perspectives.
YUP
Fuck authoritarianism, I don’t care what side of the isle it’s from.
Tolerating putin simps is even more cringe.
Based just on what's in this post and not knowing much history about it, I'm where you are right now too. If their concern is "tankie" includes unobjectionable stuff, we can at least give them the opportunity to give us some examples to make their point. If they can come up with stuff that we agree often gets the "tankie" label applied to it but is actually consistent with this instance's core principles, then we should hear them out. But if they are like "well, CCP is actually based," then no thanks.
Just go to hexbear.net for 5 minutes and you will see that it is full of people going "CCP/Russia/North Korea is based"
I'm an Eastern European leftie whose peasant ancestors (not all of them, obviously) suffered through famine, unspeakable state-sanctioned violence and extended prison terms during Stalinism and through decades of opression afterwards. The intergenerational trauma is something we're all still struggling with. I cannot bear to hear the "Well, you need to break some eggs in order to make omelette"-type of negationist twaddle and I'm reminded daily of how the authoritarian postwar regimes have made it damn near impossible to resurrect the Left in the region. Don't just fuck tankies, feed them rancid cum only.