So it was? You literally asked this in the same thread. Did you already know? Was it a genuine question? Do you know what sealioning is and can you prove it?
Under Joseph Stalin, the Soviet Union recriminalized homosexuality in a decree signed in 1933. The new Article 121, which punished “muzhelozhstvo” with imprisonment for up to 5 years, saw raids and arrests. Female homosexuals were sent to mental institutions. The decree was part of a broader campaign against “deviant” behavior and “Western degeneracy”. Following Stalin’s death, there was a liberalisation of attitudes toward sexual issues in the Soviet Union, but homosexual acts remained illegal. Discrimination against LGBT individuals persisted in the Soviet era, and homosexuality was not officially declassified as a mental illness until 1999.
[…]
Since 2000, a campaign by Russian president Vladimir Putin and the Russian Orthodox Church to promote “traditional Russian values” and oppose “liberalism” in regards to homosexuality has led to many pieces of anti-LGBT legislation being passed federally, including the banning of distribution of “propaganda of non-traditional sexual relationships to minors” in 2013, an amendment in Russia’s constitution banning same-sex marriage passed in 2020, and expansion of the 2013 propaganda law signed in 2022 to apply it to anyone, regardless of age.
Well I already had you tagged tankie from somewhere else, so you’ve rabidly defended China, and Russia, or the USSR in the past. Seeing as you’re “just asking questions” about what atrocities Stalin may have definitely done, I don’t think I buy your excuse. Also you defended him 4 days ago, so yeah.
Ps: while snooping through your profile I saw your post about rocksmith. Unless your copy has a built in cable crack, I wouldn’t bother. They’re a massive pain and don’t always work, and the quality can be hit or miss. The 40 bucks for the proprietary bullshit cable was actually worth saving myself the ass pain of using the cable crack.
i literally want to understand your opinion here, because i had heard the opposite.
yes the socialist countries arent nearly as bad as western media paints them to be, and i stand by it. china and russia included. is there a problem with this?
western leftists usually repeat a lot of anticommunist propaganda, and i seem to be attacked a lot because of how people preconceive that opinion as ‘tankie’. its hard to get an answer from anti communists after that.
ps: 40 dollars is a bit less than 1/4 of the minimum wage here, so thats a big nono for me. i got it working reasonably well with cable crack on windows, but pulseaudio didnt really like it. i suppose i should try again now that my distro is using pipewire.
ps2: you will notice that i ask ‘why’ and ‘how’ quite a lot if you go through my comment history.
It wasn’t too long ago that’s you saw fit to lecture me about how ML projects were the only long-term large-scale socialist projects to be “successful”. Maybe consider reading more thoroughly on history before making such declarations, and don’t restrict your information to sources from a personality cult.
i am assertive when ive done my research, ill ask when i dont. history is more complex and nuaced than knowing everything or not. i dont follow personality cults but i’m very aware of bias in traditional western media.
ML-adjacent revolutions are mostly still the most successful ones we ever had despite their problems. they worked pretty well long term.
i dont expect everything to be fixed in one comprehensive revolution.
mostly still the most successful ones we ever had despite their problems.
If your only metric for success is how long something lasts, then an even more successful leftist project is the Republic of Venice. If you’re thinking “But the republic of Venice isn’t leftist!” yes, that’s my point.
I guess you’ve never heard of trade unions, or you’re under some insane impression that they’re illegitimate (typical of ML sophistry, so I wouldn’t be surprised). The teamsters have existed since 1903 and in that time have demonstrated themselves to be resistant to corruption, able to recover from corruption after it takes hold, positively affected the working conditions of workers that interact with every sector and industry in an entire country and they’ve never committed a genocide, nor betrayed Anarchists in a war against fascism. Frankly, MLs ain’t got a thing on teamsters.
longevity aint the only metric. in fact socialist economies are pretty well estabilished to be the fastest growing and provides the quickest growth to quality of life. china’s growth has been unprecedented for a reason, the ussr was similar.
and saying MLs think trade unions are illegitimate is a big strawman. they are literally central to our strategy for revolution & democracy.
Yeah, because that’s what happens when a society weighed down by decades of stunted development due to mismanagement industrializes; a brief period of rapid growth as the economy catches up to the rest of the world. Incidentally, this period of rapid growth was then followed by a long period of stagnation and decline, with some sectors reaching or occasionally exceeding parity with the United States while others lagged behind. Leninism’s unique contributions to the prosperity of Russia is vastly overstated.
It’s true that China has fared far better than the remains of the USSR, but even the CCP is starting to falter from the rot of corruption. China’s infrastructure and housing are literally falling to pieces under a reign of state capitalism; construction firms are selling houses of sand because people are purchasing property as a form of investment. Considering that China is the most successful Leninist experiment, and the PRC has existed for less than a century, the record is rather abysmal.
[trade unions] are central to our strategy
Then why did Lenin abolish them? I’m glad you think highly of trade unions, but if you didn’t, you’d be neither the first, second, nor third ML that I’ve conversed with who said they were bourgeois institutions that preserved capitalism. Putting that aside, Lenin also clearly didn’t think much about democracy either, since he overthrew the duly-elected menshiviks.
a society weighed down by decades of stunted development due to mismanagement industrializes
yes, this is precisely the point of bothering to free ourselves with a painful and dangerous revolution, and a big part of why socialism is desireable. no capitalists making decisions solely for themselves.
China’s infrastructure and housing are literally falling
this one is simply untrue. they overbuilt housing and infrastructure on purpose. now that they have and excess of it, recently redirected their economy away from real estate, they literally massively divested and popped the bubble recently to focus on manufacturing instead. i also don’t expect every socialist country to be perfect and never make mistakes, even if this one ain’t it.
this sounds like the usual western media smearing of china, be careful about it since we are in the middle of a cold war.
Then why did Lenin abolish them?
soviets remained a thing before and throughout the entire existence of the USSR, again they are central to the ML strategy and democracy.
socialism is desireable. no capitalists making decisions solely for themselves.
> MLism isn’t a good example of socialism.
“Ah, but have you considered that capitalism is bad?”
painful and dangerous revolution
The October Revolution had 0 deaths on either side. It worked because the government fell to pieces instantly and there was no resistance.
this one is simply untrue […] western media smearing of china, be careful about it since we are in the middle of a cold war.
I’m marking that down on my bingo card.
they overbuilt housing and infrastructure on purpose
“No, making empty houses was all a part of Daddy Xi’s 7D Chess game!” 🤣
This sounds like tankie media lionizing China. Be careful of that, because literally all of them have always been entirely unreliable.
throughout the entire existence of the USSR
Wow, I didn’t realize the USSR ended in 1919. I’ll have to tell my friends.
central to the ML strategy
Wow, I never realized that fascists playing “we’re socialists actually” stepping directly on worker’s necks was required. I always thought it was incidental.
MLs aren’t socialists. You are not a socialist. Marx specifically warned against people who would use revolutionary language to subvert and infiltrate, and that’s tankie creeps like you.
Its the only real example my dude, ive implied its the biggest reason its the movement im in, but ill say it explicitly now. i keep having to repeat things wont be perfect from the get go, if your expectation is perfection or nothing then you will get nothing. i’m not advocating for countries be exactly like china or russia either.
Wow, I didn’t realize the USSR ended in 1919. I’ll have to tell my friends. The October Revolution had 0 deaths on either side.
I never said it didnt. You are purposefully misinterpreting me at this point.
thats only true if you consider the beggining of the revolution. look up who funded the white army and why. also look at revolutions literally anywhere else they were tried instead of cherrypicking and you will see an opposite trend.
sounds like tankie media lionizing China
china themselves said they would before they did (look up their 5yr plans btw, they frequently achieve their goals), and to much lesser extent western analysts. not “tankie media”.
i have no reason to believe your western bullshit over them on matters pertaining to chinese internal affairs, when you yourself is parroting the ‘infrastructure made of sand’ crap
Wow, I never realized that fascists playing “we’re socialists actually”
you are the one doing that. ive seen you present zero solutions or alternatives so far, and lies and misrepresentations about the ones we have. you cant consider yourself a socialist if you are an anti-communist who hates literally all socialist experiments ever tried, and repeat the western red scare propaganda about every country that ever tried it.
ML lifted maybe a couple of hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, and improved living conditions to hundreds of millions more, those are historical facts that even non-fascist neoliberals ive listened to avoid disputing. you could also present better ideas instead of criticizing something you don’t seem to understand nor have the curiosity to learn about. kindly go fuck yourself.
honestly at this point i have no reason to talk to you any further, you are turning a debate of ideas into name-calling. i love talking about politics, but this ain’t happening here anymore.
“Cuban gay writer Reinaldo Arenas wrote, “[T]he decade of the sixties … was precisely when all the new laws against homosexuals came into being, when the persecution started and concentration camps were opened, when the sexual act became taboo while the ‘new man’ was being proclaimed and masculinity was being exalted.””
Treatment was less bad in Cuba iirc but still included sending people to go work on sugar plantations, which is pretty back-breaking and horrifying labor. I mean, horrifying to the point that the Spanish colonial state were willing to force their slaves to do it, you know?
Luckily this isn’t an issue anymore as cuba has somewhat recently liberalized their constitution and legislated free medical care for trans people and decriminalized homosexuality, probably in no small part due to the “thaw” that Obama put in place (probably one of his small wins), opening them up for better tourism and money, that trump then reversed and Biden has maintained.
But shhh, you didn’t hear any that from me, Cuba’s only allowed to be evil.
The Soviet government of the Russian Soviet Republic (RSFSR) decriminalised homosexuality in December 1917, following the October Revolution and the discarding of the Legal Code of Tsarist Russia.
The legalisation of homosexuality was confirmed in the RSFSR Penal Code of 1922, and following its redrafting in 1926. According to Dan Healey, archival material that became widely available following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 "demonstrates a principled intent to decriminalize the act between consenting adults, expressed from the earliest efforts to write a socialist criminal code in 1918 to the eventual adoption of legislation in 1922.
I remember tankies telling on Reddit me how “Pushing for LGBT Rights is forcing Western ideals on non-Western people” and how “Putin killing the gays is good actually”… the Horse Shoe Theory is real
I don’t think enough Bernie voters flipped their votes to cause the Trump win. I do believe that many of them stayed home though, but I blame that on the DNC running Hillary Clinton on the most deenergizing platform. I did vote for her, but I didn’t consider her a real progressive. She was just the status quo option when Trump was dementia flavored fascism.
Is there any evidence of that? I know that 12% of people who voted for Sanders in the primary ended up voting for Trump in 2016, but where’s the evidence that they were ever Democrats? It’s just as possible that they were Republican-leaning voters who were attracted to Sanders’ message, or trying to sabotage the Democratic primary. That’s a really good narrative for Clinton supporters to soothe their chagrin at the electoral college loss, but as that article points out, that number is actually pretty par for the course in elections.
Well, the whole notion that things are on a spectrum is kind of false.
There are the people using what we know about the world right now to try to improve the conditions for all of us and who are willing to adjust course based on evidence and results, and then there are those clinging to failed notions of the past, whether it be an outdated philsophy from four hundred years ago or a failed theory from yesterday.
In that way it’s more of a binary that does not care if you’re anarchist, monarchist, communist, libertarian, democratic etc. If your ideas aren’t working and you fail to admit they aren’t working then you have become a conservative, regardless of how radical your idea was when it was concieved.
Yup, it’s always “critical support” for any country with an adversarial relationship to the “imperial core” no matter how fucked up they are on human rights, or anything else.
It’s never critical support for any of the “succdem” countries for their advances on human rights and social safety nets despite not moving towards socialism/communism, and then trying to get them moving in that direction.
Not that all or even most of the countries they support are actually moving towards socialism/communism either. The countries they list as AES (already existing socialism) make me think they have literal holes in their heads, like that guy that didn’t realize he shot himself in the head with a nail gun for years.
They’re good at quoting Marx but when it comes to who they support their only requirement is anti-western aligned countries, and they’ll twist their brains into any knots necessary to invent a narrative to justify that support.
It’s a very common thing for people to equate queerness with other concepts of otherness like “not from my group!” type pearl clutching. Bigots in a lot of places are weirdly more accepting of individual queer folks when they are noticeably foreign and more treat the concept of people being queer as an outside corrupting influence… Nevermind that the existence of queerness is basically a universal. People from non-permissive places really don’t want to believe that their culture will also constantly manifest new queer people. They often believe something along the lines of if they stamp on it hard enough it becomes more rare instead of just more people hiding and struggling in isolation and silence often risking their lives if they misjudge a social situation or dying because of a pervasive sense of dispair.
But no matter how hard you stomp the “problem” never goes away. You have to keep stomping forever in perpetuity. The boot must always rest heavy on someone’s neck and will never touch floor again because there will always be someone there to rise if the pressure ever stops. It’s in part why the concept of people essentially just being “born that way” has been so powerful.
Edit: Stop defending Tankies. If you are truly a Communist that doesnt support Russia and China, then defending the Tankies by letting them pretend ALL communists get called Tankies is only making you look bad by comparison. If Tankie was synonymous with communist, it wouldnt need to exist as a word.
2nd edit: I’m giving some of you WAAAYYY too much benefit of doubt but heres a further point, at the moment there is two options
1: You help clarify that Tankie means “Communist who Supports Authoritarian Regimes and their use of violences to suppress dissent” for people who are using the word incorrectly
or
2: You help create a smokescreen for Tankies to hide behind and let Tankie and Communist blur so Tankies can claim that all Communists get called that so the word means nothing. And if you are successful in that, the vast majority of us with great distaste for the Chinese and Russian goverment will just switch to telling ALL communists to fuck off because we certainly arent going to grow more tolerance for regimes that have no issues violently suppressing minorities
There is no 3rd option
Final Addition: 9 communists are sitting at a table when 1 Tankie decides to join the table. No one rejects the Tankie from sitting. 10 Tankies sit at a table
I feel like communism has been conflated with ‘tankie’ (as in, the meaning, not the word) for a long while thanks to the red scares. “Tankie” seems to be a more recent (or at least, recently resurrected) term that is attempting to split the authoritarianism away from ‘communism’ and bring that latter term back to its roots as ‘classless, stateless, cashless society’.
But also, you can often avoid using loaded terms like communism. Personally I like to just double down on “democracy” since it literally means rule by people and has positive connotations. If you add more and more rule by people, eventually you get communism.
Tbh, after dealing with Tankies on Lemmy for the past half year, I can understand why the red scares happened (understanding =/= agreeing with). With normal facists and bigots, you can tell they are assholes pretty much at a glance, but Tankies meanwhile seem nice and caring at first glance, but are salivating at the chance to violently revolutionize you
The Red Scare happened because it threatened the American ruling class, and America wasn’t occupied by Nazis in WW2 so they didn’t have the experience of being liberated by mostly leftist rebels. Immediately after WW2, communists and socialists were seen as liberators who freed various countries from Nazi rule, even in the UK where Winston Churchill lost re-election partly due to him going all-in on anti-communism (which the people didn’t like). As a result, Europeans were a lot friendlier to communism and were more open to adopting socialist policies. The US was both the leading capitalist power AND it was very distanced/separated from the oppression and rebellion against the Nazis, so they just saw communists as a threat.
It’s your ideal, we’re giving communists who dont support Russia and China respect by labelling Tankies as Tankies, and not Communists, but if you want to give the Tankies a smoke screen to hide behind by letting the two terms blur, then its more your loss than its mine. Russia and China are not bastions of LGBTQ rights though, so I dont know why you’d want to help the Tankies
The old adage goes “if you meet an asshole once in the morning, you merely met an asshole. If you meet an asshole in the morning, at noon and again at night, you are the asshole”
Reassess your behavior and stance; if you’re getting called a tankie it isn’t because the whole world decided to shift a definition.
It really isnt. Tankie is specifically for those who’d support Russia and China. Are you defending Russia’s invasion of Ukraine? Are you making arguements that Taiwan should become part of China? THEN you are a Tankie, but if you believe true Communism hasnt been done yet, and Russia and China DEFINITELY havent done it right, then no one who matters is going to call you a Tankie. If Tankie and Communist were synonymous, there would literally be no need for the term Tankie. You dont see “Fuck off Communists” everywhere on Lemmy, you see “Fuck off Tankies”
yeah that’s too much singular linguistic prescriptivism for me. I’ve definitely seen a litany of people here called tankies. Lots of people just decrying US imperialism, particularly what’s happening in Gaza, lots of people criticizing Biden, that’s a classic way to get accused of being a tankie, I think I’ve also seen people advocating for basic shit like healthcare being called tankies. Prison reform is a big one that’ll get you called a tankie, as well as lots of anti-police takes, for whatever reason.
Yeah. It’s a term that’s like originating out of apologia for the suppression of the Hungarian revolution, it’s not used for that anymore. The definition has changed historically and from person to person over time. It doesn’t have this clear meaning that you seem to think it does. It can have that clear meaning for you, sure, you’ve defined your use case, but you can’t really guarantee that every other person using that term is going to use it correctly. It would be, you know, theoretically, pretty advantageous for some right wingers to pose as left wing and then just kind of throw around a term commonly used in left wing circles as a derogatory term to shut down discussions, with basically no coherence to use.
Look, you can either have a term for idiots who support russia and china when they CLAIM to care about minority rights, or you can defend the tankies because SOME people are using the term incorrectly. There isnt a 3rd option at the moment. Do you want us to start telling ALL communists to fuck off instead of just Tankies? Because thats the end result of being successful with your arguement. So you can either further the clarification that Tankies are communists that Support Russia or China, or you can help build a smoke screen for Tankies to hide behind. Pick one
You could just tell them that supporting Russia and China is bad, or that those are authoritarian regimes, and cite sources, rather than dismissing them out of hand, based on what the surface level interpretation of their arguments are, you know?
We have more than a one word limit here on Lemmy, people can respond with thought out rebuttals, rather than one word dismissals. It’s just that the one word dismissals are easier to write and understand, so they’re more likely to get thrown at an argument early and then up votes after someone skims a long ass set of paragraphs.
There’s not like an either-or option there, I also really question your “well if we don’t discard tankies then we’re gonna have to discard all communists, and how would you like that!”. That doesn’t make any sense to me. Your “Pick one” is a false dichotomy. People are capable of more nuanced conversations, just labelling people and throwing around out of hand dismissals isn’t going to be helpful in actually working out anything, convincing those people, or convincing bystanders. Even if you were to convince bystanders with such a tactic, you’d be convincing them in a bad faith way where they don’t fully understand the usage of the term, so they’d be just as likely to throw it around as an out of hand dismissal without understanding what it means.
But then I suppose, you know, it’s probably gonna be easier for most people to just call me a tankie and move on, right, on the basis that my argument advocating for nuanced responses and more well-reasoned argumentation is actually carrying water and “providing a smokescreen for tankies”, so I might as well be one, right? Term gets stretched even further.
I have always been of the belief that if you are to respond, it better be with a well-reasoned and dignified comment, rather than just a kind of lazy dismissal. If people are doing shit that’s actually against the rules, then report them. If they’re engaging in bad faith behavior, you are more likely to reveal that by responding to them with good faith behavior than also responding with bad faith behavior. If you aren’t going to say something nice, don’t bother to say anything at all, or, put another way, don’t feed the trolls.
Dunno why internet rules 101 is becoming such an uncommon thing now.
Or or, if you wanna defend Tankies, I literally dont have time for you. Do I give Nazi’s time to explain the nuances of their views? No, same goes for Tankies
Or or, if you wanna defend Tankies, I literally dont have time for you. Do I give Nazi’s time to explain the nuances of their views? No, same goes for Tankies
That’s what I said people should do though? Just ignore comments and move on if they’re not actually willing to engage with what’s being said
Conservatives and liberal chuds also use it because they see us saying it, not realising that it’s a call-out of viscous authoritarianism, and not necessarily a critique of communism let alone socialism.
Anyone reading this should know, socsas ml account got banned over and over again on ml for rule 1&2 (at the time, enumerated as xenophobia and being a jerk) and eventually caught a perma for evading by doing the same thing on this account, which just got unbanned from ml a little over a week ago.
This alt has been catching bans from ml for the same reasons, including notably a unique one from the conservative community on shit because (and I’m paraphrasing) of not being there in good faith.
Too xenophobic and mean for the left, no place on the right, it’s hard out there for a conservative brony…
Of course their totallynotsocsa (yes, actually) alt on beehaw is alive and kicking just fine.
Anyone reading this should know that this is a lie, and you can easily look at the logs yourself. Better yet, the broader body of my post history should illustrate that I am not a troll. My bans from .ml have nothing to do with xenophobia of any kind, and this is a perfect example of how .ml trolls abuse this kind of language to censor even very mild dissent. And the irony of the name calling in there just perfectly illustrates how these trolls are used to special treatment, double standards and protection on their home instance. Chef’s kiss
It’s actually pretty hilarious that you took the time to write all that out but didn’t bother citing any of my own words which produced said bans. I think we all understand why.
Palestinians have the right to revolution just like the Americans, French, and Chinese did. That revolution might be bloody, but the fight for sovereignty and equality is rarely peaceful.
Socsa ml’s response, which was removed and resulted in them being banned for 1&2:
MFW American settlers went door to door executing British families and taking children hostage.
Someone else almost a month ago:
In my experience, Lemmy is not as censored as Reddit
You can disagree here, as long as you keep it civil, all is good
Socsa shits response, which had the same results:
Lmao. I went 14 years on Reddit without getting a single site ban, and barely lasted 14 days on .ml without getting banned for very controversial statements about, eg, that time Russia shot down a civilian airliner in Ukraine. And pointing out that the US revolution generally didn’t involve much mass rape. And calling out genocide denial on hexbear. And then mocking these petty bans. I’m sure this will get me another one.
What stands out here is that not only did socsa immediately jump to defend israel, which I could understand a lib doing right after October 7, but then complained six months later that they got banned for parroting the mass rape hasbara disinformation which best I can tell they didn’t even actually invoke.
Dae evil tankies ban me for telling lies smdh my dick head?
If I made this exact comment on .ml, I’d get banned for the name calling and mild sarcasm alone.
It is nice to know I’ve got fans, at least. You all know you are rapidly becoming a joke in the fediverse. I can just feel the seethe and cope. I guess you can either do better, or keep impotently trolling, and banning everyone who makes fun of you.
Trotsky is who Lenin wanted to take over the party after his death, but Stalin framed him as a power hungry authoritarian and took control of the party then forcing Trotsky to flee the USSR then had him murdered in Mexico to stop his criticisms of the USSR under Stalin’s authoritarian reign.
ehhh, unfortunately I’ve met more than my fair share of people who unironically like Stalin.
Lots of actually good communist figures out there and they go out of their way to choose the homophobic drunk domestic abuser who kept a literal child rapist as his right-hand man.
And to circle it to a common online debate, DC has its "Red Son" alternate continuity where the major divergence point is Kal-El's birthing matrix lands in Soviet territory rather than Kansas so there's a Superman born and raised wholly believing in the idealized theoretical form of communism rather than an idealized version of the US, do could get the "Goku vs Superman" argument going
Yes but not because of their heterosexuality. It was usually nationality, ethnicity, religion, being “counterrevolutionary”, or just because someone like lavrentiy baria didn’t like you
People can be executed under Communism, though ideally the death penalty would be abolished, with rehabilitation being the focus. The state in Marxian terms is the apparatus within government by which one class oppresses others, a classless society can have a government. Marxist Communism was always envisioned as a Socialist World Republic.
This is why Anarcho-Communism and Communism are different, along with strategy.
Add comment