This is a biased piece of pseudo intellectual misinformation. Communists don’t defend Russia and “lefty” (couldn’t you be more obvious in your bias if you tried) antifascists do not assume whole nations are fascist at all - clearly they attack fascists in their own countries without attacking everyone.
This is just dumb centrist shit masquerading as discourse.
Just see my last comment in the sea of tankies. All these stereotypes are real and people like that live and breathe.
This post isn’t about categories of leftists or communists, it’s about categories of genocide apologists. Most communists do not defend Russia (I hope) but among those who defend Russia, some claim to be communist.
Fake “Communist” losers
NAFO is a Nazi propaganda op. Literally. The founder, Kamil Dyszewski (aka Kama Kamelia) is a Holocaust denier who adores Hitler. I call this the SS type genocide denier. That’s actually the most common type.
In case anyone thinks the rest of NAFO distanced themselves from this guy: Lol no, he was just on stage at the NAFO summit in Vilnius.
There are waaaaay too many E’s on Lemmy.
Yeah it’s the one thing putting me off the platform. Like I’d describe myself as pretty hard left, and a pacifist. But Russia is a fascist state performing an unprovoked attack on a neighbouring nation. Just because many NATO nations have right wing problems (and tbh I feel a lot of people on the left haven’t heard the expression “don’t make the good the enemy of the perfect” - shit is bad in the West but it’s nothing compared to life in Russia) doesn’t undo that fact and Ukraine has the right to defend itself and it’s right that we support that.
The fact that some may consider NATO’s support to be hypocritical given the middle East doesn’t mean it’s wrong.
It’s really astounding. But to cheer you up, enjoy some supremely based ancoms
100%, my man. Ukraine is a sovereign state defending itself from an unprovoked attack.
If my neighbour was getting attacked, I’d help them too, out of common decency, and common sense to keep the neighbourhood safe.
The fact that some may consider NATO’s support to be hypocritical given the middle East doesn’t mean it’s wrong.
Yeah that’s the weirdest line of thinking of seen on this. “If we aren’t always the ones doing evil things then we’re being hypocritical!” Like we should never do the right thing because occasionally being on the right side is worse than being hypocritical? Or maybe it’s that doing something wrong in the past means you should never try to do the right thing? Or maybe if someone has done something wrong in the past it’s simply not possible for them to ever do something that’s right? What is the logic here?
I believe this is part of the “don’t make the good the enemy of the perfect” thing. Because we’re not good in all ways it is assumed that everything we do is for evil. You see it even some of the responses to my post - that we’re only providing support because it fuels our military industry profits. And to be honest, that is probably true. But like it’s still doing the right thing, even if it’s for the wrong reasons.
It’s been bizarre some of my interactions with group A and B. I’ve been active in leftist circles for most of my time on the internet. I definitely get and agree with a lot of the criticisms with the US, NATO, and the EU, but I don’t get how so many people think the Russian or Chinese government are any more righteous, especially considering the human rights violations and encroachments on sovereignty we’ve seen from both countries. Not just in their past either, but within the last decade!
The situation kinda feels like how Japan justified its imperialism to the outside world during the Invasion of China, South Asia, and the Pacific. Their official stance was they were aiming to rid Asia of Western imperialism and replace it with a sphere of co-prosperity, Despite this message however, they were absolutely brutal to the lands they occupied. The murdered and raped indiscriminately, and those they kept alive they enslaved and worked to death in brutal conditions. No sane person today who knows the extent of their harm would ever defend them as a power, even if their supposed message was “anti-imperialism.”
You can oppose western imperialism, US hegemony, and capitalism without siding with other imperialists, fascists, and psuedo-communists. The actions of a country should speak for them, not the messages their propaganda tries to make you believe. Considering what I know from Russia’s Soviet legacy with Eastern Europe, the actions they took against Chechnya and Georgia, their local treatment of dissidents, the brutal persecution of queer people that makes Florida look tame, the war crimes and human rights violations committed in Syria and Africa by Wagner, and the bombing, killing, raping, and kidnapping of civilians in Ukraine. I don’t see how anyone could defend them or their actions. I know the US is guilty most of it through out its history too, but you shouldn’t oppose a monster by supporting another monster.
I tried explaining this to some tankies but instead I got banned from the community before I could finish my point.
I posted on lemmy.ml calling out tankies as terrible human beings. Pointed out the term was coined by communists disgusted at their fellows cheering on the Soviet’s brutal oppression of other communists. Said tankies don’t deserve the title of “communist”, because at its core the ideals of communism are equity and human dignity. Called Marx “flawed and written for a world that existed 175 years ago”.
They did not like that at all.
I mean, Marx never claimed to have all the answers. His whole schtick was that society was progressing to a new and fairer stage of human civilization and economic organization, not that he knew the smoothest way to get there.
I always think of Marx as a brilliant economist, because he identified a lot of real issues with capitalism as industrialization was in full swing.
He really sucked on the political side of things though. “Dictatorship of the Proletariat” will always result in an Animal Farm situation. Just human nature.
I think communists fell into the trap of thinking that because a dude is right about a lot of things it means he’s right about everything. It’s kinda like a cult in that way.
As Marx once said, “If one thing is certain, it is that I am not a Marxist.”
That being said, ‘Dictatorship of the Proletariat’ is very widely misunderstood, in no small part due to Marxist-Leninists using it as cover for their vanguard bullshit.
Because they only exist to push the putin agenda. They’re the Jordan Peterson of the left, but I wouldn’t even call them leftists. They’re red fascists.
Oh look, the post is overrun by genocide apologists!
Oh look, a fascist who labels anyone that criticises a stupid right wing meme as a genocide apologist.
EDIT: for those downvoting me, I would be happy to engage in a civil discussion about why you think I’m wrong, and even change my mind if I’m mistaken.
This is extremely dumb for a number of reasons, not least of which is that it’s very clearly written with a certain bias.
A (the communist) is describing a tankie. But generally someone who identifies specifically as a communist is not authoritarian, they’re closer to anarchocommunism than the reverse.
B (the lefty antifascist) describes them as a subtype of A, but antifascists are diametrically opposed to tankies, ideologically. Also, “antifascist” is a word that has long been used to label a specific group of leftists… calling them “lefty antifascists” implies that there are also “right-wing antifascists,” trying to equivocate the sides by generalizing the word. Also, most importantly, the description is 100% bullshit.
C (the hard right) a single token addition of a very generic “hard” right person, to appear balanced. No making fun of this person like in the rest of the descriptions, just a list of facts… except “always an arsehole” which I would argue most of these people would enjoy reading about themselves because they would think it was funny and kind of true. Clearly the target audience.
D (the contrarian) this is the modern right wing lowest common denominator person, and an accurate description of the archetype, but no mention of left/right in this description. Wonder why?
E (the peacenik) what? Peacenik is just another historically left-wing-associated label. These people do not have a unified view of how to end the conflict, and certainly don’t frequently suggest ceding land to an invader. That’s a really stupid take on pacifism, and it’s just another dig at the left.
This is definitely dumb and probably just plain old propaganda.
I downvoted you because I don’t think you are being objective and instead are bringing your own prejudices and preconceptions to your analysis. Basically you are guilty of the same kinds of bias that you accuse OP of.
Of course I’m biased. Everyone is. But am I wrong? My accusation was not that OP is biased, but that the meme itself was trying to secretly promote a right-wing narrative. I understand if you don’t trust me as a biased observer, but you can still read my points and decide whether they are factually correct or not.
If you think I’ve made an error, feel free to respond with a correction. I’m not here to flame anyone, just to point out that I see a vehicle for disinformation. I respect many philosophies on both the left and the right, even if I disagree with them, but regardless of “sides” everyone deserves to make informed decisions arrived at by their own reasoning. When you are manipulated without your knowledge, your ability to reason properly is taken away from you.
My downvote was based on the fact that you didn’t make your bias clear and instead presented your opinion as fact. Maybe that’s a “me” problem as I have a background in journalism and by formal training dislike any statement of opinion that is not specifically qualified as such.
Though I don’t agree with your position, I did not downvote you on that basis and never would unless I thought you were promulgating objectively dangerous or stupid ideas.
Sorry, would you please point out which statements in my comment you feel are opinion and not fact?
Sure. Virtually all of them.
So, not interested in discussing?
I assuming you mean the post was written from a right wing perspective correct?(that’s what I got from your post at least)
I think it’s written more from a well meaning liberal perspective. Probably doesn’t understand the labels they’re using, or at the very least oversimplifying people so that they crunch into the parameters they have created.
A They probably do mean tanky, and I myself have made this association in error. After all “Tanky” in the way it is used now is not as well known as the word communist, and many people who are tankies do describe themselves as communists.
B I’ve met people like these myself. One of my friends was in this camp until recently. Many of these people still look at Ukraine as it was pre Maidan, and don’t realize the majority of people within the country don’t support the fascist elements within. Plus there is Russian prop specifically aimed at hitting antifascists. They sold the initial invasion as a “denazification”. If you are just listening to the words spoken by the leaders, and not seeing the atrocities the Russians are committing in Ukraine, I can see how one could fall for it.
C Describes a lot of the people in my part of the US actually, though, not all of them support Russia fighting in Ukraine. Rather they are more of a combination of this and E, where they want to get back to admiring Russia without dealing with the cognitive dissonance of Russia committing warcrimes in Ukraine, and also getting their ass handed to them.
D This used to be me until maybe 2014, and God knows where I would be today if I still acted this way. Basically anything that was considered “bad” of “forbidden”, I wanted in. The upside is this is what led me into reading the Communist Manifesto, the Quran, and other “forbidden” materials that led me out of my close minded conservatism, but on the otherhand, I also read Mein Kampf, gave the BotD to many fascist and conferderate leaning people, and followed a lot of Russian news uncritically, and even had a Soviet idolization phase of my own. A lot of my mindset at the time was this really weird form of libertarianism combined with unbridled contrarianism.
E I feel this can include a lot of people from any perspective. Leftists who think appose NATO more than Russia’s imperialism, Rightist who see the writing on the wall, and think the war should end while Russia is still ahead, to people who associate the increase in costs of living with the war, and simply want it to end no matter what ASAP for their own sake. I feel this could be expanded into several catagories, but then again, everything here is a severe oversimplification.
So are there flaws with this post: absolutely, but I don’t think it was written in bad faith.
Communists don’t defend Russia
Communists shouldn’t defend the Russian Federation. Yet for inexplicable reasons, many self-proclaimed communists online do so. Typically they’re tankies with all sorts of other problematic opinions.
Well American conservatives also defend Russia, that doesn’t mean they’re communists
So stop associating things
I think you’re a little confused. I never claimed all Russian supporters were communists, or vice-versa for that matter.
At least soviet gulags were just concentration camps, not extermination camps.
The left spectrum is the best one :P
