Asklemmy

43896 readers

955 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
[email protected]: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Are you a 'tankie' (lemmy.ml)

submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

321 comments fedilink hide all child comments

edit: this is now closed future comments won't be counted

I keep seeing this instance is overrun with tankies so hey, lets do an informal survey like I've seen on hexbear

respond with YES or NO in the first line of your comment and i'll tally everything in a couple of days, lets say I'll try and collect everything on the sunday the 9th (10+gmt sorry)

not sure thisll work, be nice, have fun

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Sure, but I mean at what point, right?

To cut to the chase, I'm asking what specifically separates Tankies from Communists. Where is the line drawn? I see a lot of people (myself included) labeled a tankie for recommending people read Marx, or saying that Lenin was a Marxist, regardless of if you agree with him or not.

At what point would a Communist be considered a tankie?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I thought that the line was that one supports owning the means of production and the other supports authoritarian governments, am I confused?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago

Socialists support some form of Workers owning the Means of Production, of various types.

Communists are Marxists, that advocate for a specific form of Socialism, a worker state, that will eventually result in a Stateless, Classless, Moneyless society.

Tankie has been used to slander all manner of leftists, but the number of people that actually fit the definition of the slander is very small. Many people who do not fit that actual definition are still called a tankie.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The hard part of politics is drawing hard lines. But I think many would say it's authoritarian at the point when a government is enforcing a specific ideology with force and violence, and limiting personal freedoms.

I personally don't understand how someone can be authoritarian and communist when communism is classless, but to be authoritarian there must essentially be an authority in a separate hierarchical class. But I also likely have more to learn so feel free to correct me

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

I would say by that definition, every system is authoritarian to different degrees, and as such we all just pick whatever degree we are okay with. It's vibes based, not metrics based.

Communism is classless, yes, but Communism must be built, as it is the eventual elimination of contradictions. You may wish to read Critique of the Gotha Programme, where Marx makes a good critique of a bad Socialist program and advocates for a different Socialist method of reaching Communism.