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

  • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    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?

    • Empathy [he/him]@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

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

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        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.

    • GeneralVincent@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      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

      • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        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.