Tankies

>>>/leftpol/

I find it interesting that the theory thread has neither Holla Forumsyps nor many ☭TANKIE☭s.

Where did everyone go?

GETchan

The rise of ☭TANKIE☭s on this board proves the left is dead and will never come back. They are the fucking scum of the earth defending horrid regimes the exact same way fascists do, and despite it being proven that their politico-economic model of socialism never works. B.O. is especially bad for pushing their tendency on a board that was meant to be for the whole left.

Why do you say that considering it has worked just fine in multiple places for decades, without bokm-and-bust cycles, meanwhile any other system like market "socialism" was nothing but an utter failure.

kill yourself

Yall stop being assholes

It worked worse then keynsian capitalism, regardless of its ability to avoid boom-bust cycles. It was incapable of innovating anywhere but the military, despite domestic technology being what improves quality of life. It didn’t even last a century, and was unable to subvert the US despite both countries engaging in covert activity against eachother. Most important of all it was blatantly less repsectful of personal freedom than liberal capitalist countries.

Any criticism, even constructive risked resulting in being executed or gulaged if it struck a nerve with the state. Artists could only create approved of media stifling the creative potential of the country.

Even if you support economic planning, the USSR is still terrible since their models of planning and calculation were indefensible shit.

Market socialism was never implemented as any of its advocates described, not even close. Yugoslavia was still a planned economy, even with its market elements.

I'm slowly turning into a tank, but I quite frankly hate seeing this board turn into a circlejerk echochamber. I'm really displeased with how BO has been handling this stuff as of late.

I've yet to come across a social democracy that industrialized without profits to be redistributed or had zero unemployment. In fact, Keynesian social democracies tend to increase unemployment due to tougher market entry. Besides that, Keynesian social democracy ran dry and was replaced with neoliberal capitalism.
Despite computers, space travel, microwaves, calculators, nuclear energy, computer tomography, etc. - kill yourself.
The Human Development Index in the Eastern Bloc was one of the highest in world and was objectively vastly superior to what preceeded and succeeded it.
As opposed to whatever you advocate that didn't even last more than a few years. The difference between social democracy is that it collapsed economically while the Eastern Bloc was dismantled politically.
Such as? Do you have an example of that?
Again, source? Criticism was widespread. The gulag system didn't even exist anymore after 1950.
You could create whatever you wanted, if you wanted state funding you'd had to wait for approval obviously. Surprisingly, the amount of books banned was higher in the West than in the East.
I like how you add the word "even" as if this is somehow a controversial stance among communists. You also give no arguments or reasoning for your explanation.

Most of the ☭TANKIE☭s on here are unreflective dogmatic contrarians. They're more focused on trying to defend the past then really providing ways forward, and many of them fall for anti-american contrarianism whereby any regime against america is somehow our ally. A very undialectical outlook indeed.

Muke worded this badly but it is a weird thing indeed. Many m-l aren’t either, though, I like many of them, FinBol is great for example

But it seems a real phenomenon that some shitty ☭TANKIE☭s are either crypto-nationalist brocialists or super-SJW decolonizers

I don't have to regurgitate decades old anti-communist propaganda for a "dialectal" outlook, defending actually-existing socialist states form slander is not exclusive with having a future outlook. That being said, considering that all the other formulated alternatives to Marxism-Leninism are vague utopian bullshit and conveniently retreat into the realm of constant criticism without bringing anything substantial to the table I think the approach most anti-MLs have to be often dishonest. Complaining that you don't like the cake you are being served is preposterous when your attempt of making a cake ended in tripping over and breaking both of your legs before you even entered the store to acquire the ingredients.

I made completely different experiences with Marxist-Leninists IRL, this is an internet phenomenon mostly. The reason why FinnBol for example fits neither description is because he is also grounded in real life activities.

The same thing could be said for anarchists.

DPRK has to utlize blackmarket means of aquiring currency and Cuba is currently moving towards "market socialism" with it's tolerance of petty bourgeois industry and cooperatives. DPRK is also allied with revisionist China. I don't see any point in uncritically defending either, as if they are the models we need to emulate. What does either have to offer to the proletariat in US, Europe, and elswhere? Neither are really in a position to assist revolutions abroad, considering the absence of the USSR. Maybe stop fetishizing extremely isolated and decaying socialist countries and instead start thinking of ways to move forward

This is hardly an option, they are suffering from the greatest sanctions in human history.
We have to wait an see. I'm sceptical but their leadership has repeatedly denied that this would be going into a market socialist direction, rather decentralized planning. We have to wait see what the steps are once Raúl is replaced. I'll give them credit but I won't hold back my criticism when they pursue a more revisionist path.
An "ally" which sanctions their entire fossil fuel exports and bans tourism
This isn't an ideal world, the models they've designed are born out of the material conditions and their level of harshness they are confronted with. Considering that revolution is more likely to happen in a Second or Third world country than in European or North America the proletariat will be confronted with a similar predicament.
Marxism-Leninism is not a dogma, it's a guide to action. A potential socialist state in Europe or North America will look different in some regards, but maybe also similar to what has been before in some other regards. The decisive thing is that the revolutionary theory of Marxism-Leninism has been proven correct, which is a vanguard party, democratic centralism, dialectical materialism, dual power and anti-opportunism. It's an adaptable ideology. The construction of the socialist society however will be more distinguished, but I also would expect a reindustrialization being necessary in the First World as well, which would be conducted similarly to how it was conducted in previous Marxist-Leninist states.

The idea that M-L has been "proven correct" is itself undialectical. It implies M-L must be an unchanging set of principles in a world of ever changing circumstances. The uncritical assertion of M-L as the perfect and only system of human advancement towards socialism leaves out things that must be criticized like the persistant cult of personalities, the exclusivity of party leadership, and even the abandonment at times of such principles like democratic centralism. DPRK survives, as does cuba, but survival is not enough to advance towards communism. I don't have any problem supporting "libsoc" revolutions so long as they are indeed challenging capitalism, and they have historically (though often times quite hypocritical in their actions), and I can't see any way we can win against capitalism unless we are able to recognize and work with factions of the left that are not M-L. Hell, even M-L factions fight with each other more often than not.

Any clash between the various ideologies of anti-capitalism will end with ML prevailing, as proven by history. Feel free to leave at any time.

TO KEEP YOU IS NO BENEFIT. TO DESTROY YOU IS NO LOSS.

Gotta love how you conviently excise words just to misrepresent my point. I said he technological innovation was purely military oriented and further that it was independently developed by western powers.

You say social democracy collapsed but scandanavian countries and most of Europe are doing fine. Your point about human rights and censorship is delusional, it doesn’t even deserve to be argued with.

Yugoslavia was indeed not market socialism proper, this is so eaily verified it’s clear your just being willfully ignorant to maintain your own ego. You are mentally ill, it’s the only way to have to ideology you do, you deserve to be grouped with Nazis and treated the same.

"Winning" hasn't exactly worked out for us too well so far.

You're the one who should get lost

But that's what its not. Its scientific marerialist analysis is correct, proven through induction and deduction, to compare it with natural sciences: There is always going to be an unchanging set of axioms as to how the universe works, yet scientists discover new things every year that complete a certain picture we can draw of our universe.
Cult of personality is not inherent in Marxism-Leninism. This has always been a phenomenon that arose organically out of masses, which sometimes embraced ny the leadership, sometimes taken with a grain of salt. The only time it was enforced was under Ceaușescu, and I'd argue he wasn't a Marxist-Leninist anyway. Democratic centralism is an requirement for unity during a revolution, and unless you are telling me the next revolution is going down peacefully and without arguments, I don't see a reason to discard of it.
Which is not their fault at all.
I never said I would oppose it. If an anarchist revolution proves itself to be viable, it is self-evident for us to support it, as anarchists would be prove to be correct. But let's be realistic now, what are the alternatives brought forth?
Utopian as it doesn't solve the contradictions of capital, IMF says hello
Utopian since the state has class character and you can not abolish the state before you abolish classes
Degenerates into opportunism or gets neutered since it doesn't challange the state apparatus
Utopian as it wants to skip everything and get to full communism right away, this has never happened in history and is completely unpractical, there is no "spontaneous consciousness" that magically guids the proletariat to communism
Actually not that bad but unions are useless these days and the state has the power to crush dual power unless the state isn't seized by the proletariat, I can see working together with DeLeonists though but I don't see much hope for it without a vanguard party

It is okay for people to be critical of Marxism-Leninism if the alternatives weren't so useless. You should take off the ☭TANKIE☭ flag and replace it with a generic red flag or hammer and sickle.

I don't deny that there was military innovation. But you are incorrect about the theory that there was no civil innovation.
They still have problems, unemployment, low wage sector, etc., Norway does well because they sell a lot of oil but they have their own neoliberals that are about to reduce the welfare state, plus they profit from imperialist exploitation.
This isn't reddit, you have to support your point with an argument. Appeal to "common sense" or the liberal mainstream doesn't work here.
I couldn't really care though, the laws of capital don't give a shit about your market socialist utopia, there will still be monopolization, falling rate of profit, labor market, accumulation of debt etc. - read Marx.
Great argument "comrade".

seriously, fuck ☭TANKIE☭s. Stalin and his retarded ideology is the worst fucking thing that happened to the left. Postmodernism is better than that mass murderer. USSR apologists and turd-worldist are the fucking reason people will never be comfortable with socialism, and it's they're the reason that nothing will fucking change. Everybody will just sit around until capitalism eliminates all life on earth.

Pinpoint a thing about "Stalin's ideology" that you specifically disagree with.

Burger detected

They aren't always diametrically opposed as well

The leading cadres of the CPC do.

This could be a great moment to ask about it, what do you "Communists" call ☭TANKIE☭s?
I any ML a ☭TANKIE☭? Anyone who supported the USSR ove USA? Or the original term (wich btw was coined by people that you would call "stalinists") to decribe people who supported Krushev and it's revisionist policies?

I don't want to become a ☭TANKIE☭ but everytime the "anti-tankies" turn out to be completely insufferable retards.

...

Sounds to me like you were looking for an excuse from the get-go.

I definitely wouldn't label myself a ☭TANKIE☭ yet.

I never said abandon democratic centralism. I said democratic centralism has been abandoned at times and we should be critical of that abandonment. Whether or not it's "their fault" is irrelevant. The point isn't to asign blame, but rather to state that the fetishizment of either country is rather pointless and counter productive, as if we can move forward by convincing people of these places. Even small M-L groups seem to consistently generate cults of personalities, so the attribution of this to merely being "the masses" is handwaiving at best. If M-L is not an unchanging set of principles, and instead a way of interpreting history and the world through the lens of historical materialism, why do you insist on dogmatically asserting the impossibilty of other groups to achieve change? You're estimation of these groups are purely strawmen. Anarchists have indeed created entities that were proletarian in nature and asserted a class dictatorship against the bourgeois (despite pretending otherwise). Titoism is pure cancer since it's just krushevite tier revisionism, but I don't dismiss the usefulness of cooperatives and the organizing principle that lie within them, especially within the greater context of a dual power. I don't know much about communization, but the assertion that it seeks "instaneous communism" is a strawman. "Democratic Confederalism" is not without it's merits, and many M-L groups rightly support it. So again, why the assertion that M-L is the only path towards socialism? Why the insistence of it's infallibility given the actual problems we've observed in M-L parties and states? This is nothing but dogmatic and unproductive.

yeah, who wouldn't be pissed that bo has been tearing this board apart?

“Russia was saved by the fact that we’re not purely white”

What did he mean by this?

GETchan is also dead

Leave at any time

Purists, please.

Nice Reddit spacing

got em

I for one welcome the rise of ☭TANKIE☭s that aren't actually just racist assholes or just flat out retarded.

How did you get rid of that obnoxious "SAGE!" ?

Phone or tablet posting

Capital letter for the S

Oh. Do we no longer support abolition of private property?

Cult of personalities is not part of ML,

Nor this.

Again - how is this part of ML?

Any such "revolutions" are either stillborn or borderline Fascist - see Venezuelan anarchists, for example.

Last time intersectionality gave birth to Fascism.

Trying to work towards socialism with an ounce of pragmatism will set you on the path of treads.

Tąnkies are not talking over, Anarchists make this excuse every week. Isn't it funny that all the Holla ForumsAnarchist discords ban Tănkies, but all the Tånkie discords let Anarchists in. Holla Forums is not an anarchist safe space.

Discords are hardly related to Holla Forums

Off topic, but why is it that every single discord server (related to leftism) I've been invited to has been absolute garbage?

Honestly I don't know, elitism maybe?

Liberals LARPing as socialists.

Because it either is a giant shitpost center or some retard shared a link to Holla Forums (for second example see this): discord.gg/wHP4rb

Discord is only used by retards who don't value their privacy and willingly compromise their own and their comrades security.

...

>>>/1917/

What's this board?

The USSR also had low wages and unemploymemt and engaged in imperialism.

“The liberals all just lie” is the ultimate non-argument. Whenever anyone presents facts you just claim it was fabricated the same Nazis talk about the holocaust.

You know, market socialism doesn’t mean you can’t have regulation, oversight, or welfare.

well at least you guys aren't just crypto-reactionaries who just like ML aesthetics, before tankposters were always guaranteed morons.

Easy solution to your problem: become a ☭TANKIE☭ as well.

Would you mind giving a source on unemployment in USSR?

The dirty secret is that all ancoms, socs and demsocs are ☭TANKIE☭s under the skin, while leftcoms are just ☭TANKIE☭s that don't want to do anything. Some have a thicker veneer than others of course, and thank god - naked ☭TANKIE☭s are incredibly obnoxious.
If you're not a ☭TANKIE☭ deep down, you are a liberal.

Haha you sure showed them. Simply epic comrade.

Rojava is a tool of imperialists.

dafuq is a ☭TANKIE☭

Tankies are really like Holla Forums they can't help being butthurt at everything so they have to keep strawmanning and building shit memes like your pic

""Tankie"" posts tend to be high quality by Holla Forums standards, maybe the rest of you nerds need to step up your game.

it has been proven correct that you need vanguard party to capture the state apparatus
but it also has been proven that after revolution and initial build up of planned economy party becomes a dead fucking weight

somehow MLs always ignore this fact, clinging to their holy cow party just like Molotov and Kaganovich were delusionally clinging even when their beloved party was going full suicide perestroika mode

also MLs conveniently forget about Stalin's Constitution where party was essentially removed from power de jure
they also forget that Stalin tried to retire from his position of a general secretary not because he grew tired and wanted to retire from politics altogether, but because he wanted to only be the head of the government

on IXX party congress he lost his temper and smeared in shit every party leader including Molotov and Kaganovich
he also conveniently died right after, all medical personnel involved got gulaged or exiled, his medical records card disappeared
you need to only add two and two

or what about Beria?
he was a minister, a government official
he got arrested by Zhukov on whose orders? Zhukov points at Khrushchev
but this Khrushchev was a fucking nobody, he was purely a party rat, he was not a government official
and of course MLs don't see any problem with dual power here, some party rat wipes his ass with Constitution, but don't you dare to touch Lenin's Party, our Light in the Darkness
and of course Molotov and Kaganovich supported witch burning of Beria because he dared to threaten our holy party
Molotov especially was a literal cuck, got his ass purged and was still groveling before CPSU even on his deathbed

democratic centralism can only work if there is an efficient system of democratic control
and no dual power, it is either soviet democratic centralism or party democratic centralism
and I prefer soviet democratic centralism for obvious reasons
I'd say when planned economy is a status quo just ban all the parties and practice issue voting

also fuck off with your dialectics, nobody cares about your philosophical wankery and there's no place for it in politics

Everything you've mentioned there; I've seen tаnkies say.

/thread

Initially I thought this to be the case, but then came to conclusion that it is propaganda. The truth is exactly the opposite. Most of the problems Soviets faced were not due to power of the Party. but due to its growing weakness.

It didn't. Party was paralyzed at the time. Moreover, Party was put down quite hard after Soviets collapsed - a bit of an inconsistency that even you should notice.

Party was never ruling Soviet Union directly.

Any evidence to support this very bold statement?

Well, this certainly proves something. Not sure if that proves that Party is unnecessary.

Khrushchev was supported by many state officials.

> [hysterionics]
The topic of CPUS Revisionism in 1950s and intrigues that surrounded it is quite interesting, but insufficient to prove the things you are trying to prove.

Soviets never got to "status quo".

There is.

...

...

Thanks for proving his point

maybe not on here, but the number of people defending SwCC has ballooned over the past year

Already seen that pretty pathetic but nothing new. Also not an anarchist but it just shows the lack of argument by ☭TANKIE☭s

we wouldnt have to tank if the anarchists and leftcoms just left

Yeah great another fucking echochamber. That is surely exactly what we need.

I have an idea. Let's retake Holla Forums.

Whats the worst that could happen?

Oh, noes. There will be actual discussions, not filled with inane posts of those who don't understand even basic concepts.

Enjoy your circlejerk.

So you truly think that places like pol and twitter are places of healthy discussion… worthless tripfag choke on a shotgun

Also just go to /marx/ you fucking mong. Tripfags were a mistake.

...

/thread

The difference is they were never institutionally preferred. B.O has blatantly said they want the board to be more ML and are butthurt that it's not, and their rules clearly show a preference to ML ideology. Rójava discussion is suppressed, and pro-Anarchism threads are anchored simply because they're pro-Anarchism. I have no idea if this is why the board is bleeding posters and activity, but it certainly doesn't help when the B.O clearly shows favoritism (while also just being a horrible admin in general), just like the vol at the top says. Once an echochamber starts forming it becomes an uphill battle to fight against it, which only leads it to be more entrenched. Most of us didn't come here because we wanted an echochamber with a biased B.O.

...

what propaganda? that politburo initiated revisionist reforms? this is a historical fact. FACT
now you're talking out of your ass
politburo initiated every revisionist reform, but somehow if only politburo had even more power even tho it already had all the power all this could've been avoided
fuck off

who are you fucking kidding here
it was politburo directive that cancelled state monopoly on trade, even more it prohibited state enterprises to directly engage in foreign trade, they could only trade thru private middleman
it was party decision that allowed non paper accounting money to be freely exchanged for paper rubles and foreign currency which was an actual point of departure when the whole perestroika spiraled out of control

your beloved party commited harakiri
you have no one else to blame

and you see no problem in this?
according to constitution Party was reduced to purely propaganda agency
de facto after Stalin politburo could replace ministers, appoint ministers, interfere with a planning process, override decisions of supreme soviet etc etc
why have constitution at all then if it ain't worth shit anyway?

fact that he did not try to retire from his position as a Chairman of the Council of Ministers
fact that after the war all questions of industry, investment, planning were considered on the meetings of the Council of Ministers while politburo meetings only considered questions of awards, ideological propaganda work etc

I seem to recall BO telling all MLs to post on /marx/ instead. No such declarations were made to the anarchists.

He wanted MLs to post on /marx/ to grow the board so he could have an active echochamber there, but since no one wants to go to a dead board he decided instead to try to turn Holla Forums into /marx/.
He heavily implied that everyone who disagrees with his moderation should go to /leftpol/, which of course no one will do because board splits never work.

...

Literally make better arguments you fucking faggot. The reason you think "tankies" are taking over the board is because you see them constantly BTFO nominal leftists and liberal talking points with little to no response. When the ultraleftists and anarchists do respond, they either stop arguing or end up agreeing with them. See DPRK thread for proofs

BO stated a desire to use /marx/ as an organizational platform and Holla Forums for explicit propaganda purposes. The only reason ANY opposition voices are even permitted at this point is because a propaganda platform has zero value without an audience and the hope was to scoop up some of the remaining "fence-sitters;" everything else that poses meaningful opposition to this goal gets removed. You also have the problem where actually trying to enforce a full removal of dissidents would be nearly impossible under present conditions (ie virtually all of the volunteer staff has stated they will not be enforcing the newer policies under its currently stated interpretation, sans possibly the newest mods brought in within the last month or two), so its mostly just the most prolific/notable posters who get shut down.
Holla Forums in this context is no longer a community or grounds for socialization between various groups; it is an explicit recruitment ground.

That's retarded. At least the latter upholds the original policy of Holla Forums in that no tendency in the left is forbidden or restricted under the rules. The former makes no attempt to misdirect from the fact that is exclusively for "various strands of Marxists, but with favor to ML hardliners."

Its the opposite, BO was pleading for the tanks on /marx/ to come and shit up Holla Forums because abandoning discussion here was revisionism or anti-communist or some stupid shit.

This was just before Bookchinites got purged and the board spilt and all that shit.

Leftypol infighting is a lot more interesting than pol infighting. It's not just "No YOU are the jew kike shill" back and forth for 3 threads.

lmfao, /marx/ literally has like 3 posters and they're better read than the majority of leftypol

Repeating fuggen abarkiggies and fuggen dankyes isn't much of an improvement.

Are all shit for brains going to ignore the vol's posts? Even leftypol was majority leftcom, there was never an active agenda with policies behind it.

Yes.

*even when

The OP in the DPRK thread is probably the only person on the board to have done any research about the country. There's no counterarguments because no one knows anything about the country. He could be saying ridiculous bullshit and no one would know because no one knows shit about DPRK.

See its absolutions such as this that makes people dissuaded from being a ☭TANKIE☭ in the first place.

better start researching then

epic

thank you for this. Based Ruth

Do you think this means I like Roo or something?

what bizarro Holla Forums you came from?

That literally just proves my point. If you're so worried about muh ☭TANKIE☭ takeover then do some research and BTFO him. You won't though, and probably can't.

This is pure Paranoia, what actually happened was half the anarchists became left communists, and half of those leftcoms and Bordigists so that means there is an assload of undercover tank rolling around pretending it isn't a tank. On top of that, ☭TANKIE☭ mods doesn't make a ☭TANKIE☭ board, from all the polls that stuff is all wildly unpopular and the BO is just being the smelly cunt he is. On the top of that you shouldn't be so sectarian, the vast majority of socialist experiments have been based if you care to look at the history, appreciating the USSR doesn't mean you can't favour more "anarchist" praxis in this day and age. The fact is almost nobody here is actually a ☭TANKIE☭ or an anarchist, I would be surprised if even one single one of us is part of an actual revolutionary party. I think I've seen one guy say he was part of some whacked out Maoist thing that had some third world stuff going on. But apart from that I've seen jack shit. Even the people who are active probably wouldn't consider what they are doing specifically revolutionary, the fact that its so factionalised in general therefore is pretty pretentious particularly when you see it IRL. We can be certain of one thing, whatever emerges will be neither anarcho communism as it has been talked of before, Marxist Leninism, communalism, council communism, whatever, it will be something new, because these forms were time and condition specific, and the conditions have changed.

You assume that by "btfoing" someone, they will stop coming around. Is this literally your first day in the internet?

You don't

youtube.com/watch?v=Vsw0ALI4Eek

retard, you btfo him to convince onlookers onto your side and to shut his trap on the topic, not to make him go away and stop hurting your feelings.

it would give other left tendencies more respectability and maybe the tanks would start agreeing and maybe be less vocal. This is all assuming that the anti-tanks could actually bring good discussion to the table, which they prove time and time again incapable of doing

yeh in my opinion this board should basically be one giant civil argument ( but its the internet so not that civil). If you can't hold your ground lurk, read and think

...

Sounds like the B.O is a tyrannical boss and the vols need to unionize and seize the means of moderation, i.e. collectively agree to follow your own rules while appealing every retarded B.O ban.

For what, to btfo some fag on an imageboard? The DPRK is irrelevant to modern Leftism, most normies are scared shitless about it, and the only thing it might be able to proof is that a planned economy can work, which you don't need the DPRK to know.
It's not an appeal to authority, it's the fact the vol obviously knows what's going on more than we.

It's not about BTFOing someone on some irrelevant state, it's the fact that the B.O is intentionally trying to change the nature and makeup of the board, including changing it from a general discussion forum for all Leftists into a recruiting platform.

Arguments about whether the DPRK is shit is not a relevant ideological argument to have.

Another problem I failed to include in previous post is the large number of "Tankies" who are actually just Holla Forumsyps appropriating the language to capitalize on the recent chaos in order to stir shit (not that it's terribly difficult). A number of the "tankie influx" is in fact Holla Forums attempting to astroturf in order to worsen tensions.

Pic related is a sample of the other posts made by users like this.

…

I've seen this board go to hell and i've been here for a long ass time, this bo shit is killing the board more than when all the lit fags started leaving

fuck off, newfag

fuck off retard

This is literally a fucking liberal-tier argument that belongs on reddit. First of all brainlet, tankposters are not nazis. Second of all, deliberations are made with the goal of changing peoples' opinions and generally fostering more though-provoking dialogue, which does legitimately happen on this board, despite lots of autistic fuckery on the side. Some of the most productive threads on this board (at least before the nuke) were arguments with nazis and ☭TANKIE☭s. If you can't handle that, then you need to get the fuck off of this board and post on twitter where you belong.

Not if you go by the level of their argumentation

In what world does "beating a dead horse for the upteenth time" constitutes "productive" or "thought provoking"?

this is now a pro-tankie thread
post aesthetic stuff

Yeh because fuck dialectics

well, how closed off and slow do you want the board to be?

Very good post.

that's nazifag trying to turn people against ☭TANKIE☭s though

this is the problem with tanks, they can't see the knock on effects of their belligerent attributes, which end up undermining them in the end

All you need to do is read the threads. The ☭TANKIE☭s and nazis force posters to bring their A game in defending their beliefs. In fact, I'm curious what these "dead horses" are. Do you not think concepts and ideas need to constantly be reassessed and open to criticism?

WHAT?!?!?
Someone explain this bullshit

USSR, and therefore ☭TANKIE☭s, are the only reason anybody cared about what any other strain of socialism had to say. And the only thing they wanted to hear is your condemnation. Now that USSR is gone, the reactionaries, which sheltered the anti-soviet pseudo-socialists, have no further use for their useful idiots. Being puppets and useful idiots to reactionaries is the only praxis non-tankies have.

Why do ☭TANKIE☭s always assume anyone who criticizes them must be a an ancom? Are they really such childish black-and-white thinkers?

...

Not at all. But what are we gaining if so little has changed that it`s literally the exact same talking points, the exact same arguments, strawmen, fallacies and handwaving. It`s exactly the same, again and again.

woke

Because you're all irrelevant. Marxist-Leninists (ie ☭TANKIE☭s) are the only type of communists in human history who have managed to create proletarian revolutions and many socialist states.

When you're special snowflake brand of leftism accomplishes anything in the real world, we might start caring.

Just for clarification, I'm the guy from the DPRK thread, and I just wanna state that I'm not the OP of the thread. I have also mentioned numerous times that it is impossible to know everything about the country, but I've argued arround the things we do know. I don't make any positive statements about the DPRK if there is evidence to suggest the opposite. I think I've been quite honest in that thread, you are welcome to prove me otherwise.

The thing is, most of the detractors of the DPRK make positive claims all the time ("concentration camps", "starvation", etc.) so your critique goes both ways. I've said that the DPRK has a somewhat functioning workplace democracy, because I actually visited the fucking country and saw it, now, you can argue the cooperative I visited was merely a showcase, but then the same guy posts pictures of satelite images showing rectangular buildings and says that this is proof that they have concentration camps? Give me a fucking break.

And the only praxis ☭TANKIE☭s have is brutally creating state-capitalist regimes that inevitably falls to revisionism. Now, why are you shitposting here instead of working towards creating the next one-party dictatorship that inevitably [COLLAPSES]?

You mean the only communists in history who have gotten the chance to show countless times how they aways fail. Also, the Russian Revolution happened before ML was even created.

I'm not implying you are dishonest, I'm just saying people bringing up the thread as example of no one being able to argue against MLs is retarded since you're probably the only person on this board who has done this kind of research into the DPRK.

This is a reasonable post. I never understood the infatuation anarchists have with Leftcoms - these guys are, by theory, even more "tankie" than us, they just don't want to do anything. If you read Bordiga you will find out that one of his criticisms of Stalinism is "parliamentarianism" and the such. Stalin unironically wasn't undemocratic enough for Leftcoms. If Leftcoms would do anything, they would gulag anarchists ten times harder than Marxist-Leninists. Except the latter is still easier to attack because they try to deal with the weight of past revolutions whereas Leftcoms try to dissociate themselves from it.

My apologies, I appear to have been a bit unclear. My point was that there's a lot of false-flagging at hand that's making this situation even worse than it already is on both sides of this.

Regardless, looks like I've said too much and have gotten canned. Good luck everyone, here's hoping there's a light to be found somewhere at the end of this tunnel.

Leftcom is a shitty term because it refers to people you're talking about, specifically Bordigists, along with Council Communists, are AFAIK are pretty libertarian. Using a term like leftcom only tells you what they're against, not what they're for.

Bordigists are not by any means libertarian. When I talk of Leftcoms I refer to Bordigists, people who like Pannekoek's stuff or adherents of Dauve. I think there is a difference between Bordigists who often refer to themselves as Leninists and the ones preferring communization, as the latter rejects vanguard parties alltogether.

I've been on Holla Forums since the beginning, and I don't think anybody would deny that Leftcommunism of the aforementioned brands was extremely popular here, there was a rather well-read Bordigist here who built a personality cult arround himself ("PLEASE LEFTCOMS EXPLAIN TO ME XYZ"). He has left and since then Leftcommunism became more unpopular again. The popularity of ideologies on here is always dependent on the amount of quality posters on here, or real-life events: Communalism for example dropped in popularity once it became clear that the USA is more than just superficially entangled in R*java.

I do like the design of the Albanian party logo for some reason, simple yet nice

I think he's still around, just not so active.
It's unfair to call it that, he didn't tripfag or anything.

t. eternal victim

Do you guys count Maoists (as in MLMs), cuz theyre doing wonderful works for capitalism right now. Or do you conveniently discount China and Vietnam when considering Lenin's influence on socialism?

Concrete achievements of "tankie" regimes:
-Brought healthcare to hundreds of millions of people
-Brought literacy and education to hundreds of millions of people
-Liberated hundreds of people from feudal and semi-feudal conditions of brutal exploitation
-Liberated hundreds of millions of people from colonial pillage and slavery

Concrete achievements of leftcom/anarchist regimes:
-…

wut

Don't forget the breakthroughs in science in technology of the ☭TANKIE☭ regimes, plus the whole idea of space communism came from the USSR, even if the USSR held it as a dream of the future.

What was the mode of production that abolished feudalism again?

...

Vietnam and China did amazing works in the fields of literacy, electrification, infrastructure, women's rights, vaccination, modernization, etc. And that's not to mention that Vietnam managed to strike a huge blow to American imperialism, one that hurt the American bourgeoisie so much that even the mention of "Vietnam" today is painful to them. China did similarly great first in driving the imperialist "nationalists" out of China and then protecting Korea from American imperialism.

And these were all explicitly Marxist-Leninist governments. What exactly have ultra-lefts, leftcomms etc accomplished in the real-world?

I know they aren't, I'm saying Councilcoms are, but they're both considered leftcoms.

he started using "Black Book of Communism"-tier sources and was sent to the time out box

Councilcoms and communizationfags are anarchists in denial, so newbies are attracted to this fancier sounding version of what they already believed. I remeber when leftcoms were one guy with shit memes and long pedantic posts, they didn't get really big until they started poking fun at themselves and pulling in redditors to increase numbers. The best cure for de-infactuation with leftcoms is to read leftcom texts and find out it's either pretentious anarchism or weird Leninism.
Which shouldn't be a surprise given that the leftcom line regardless of flavor is repeating the real movement ad nauseam while MLs wish to apply the same tactics that resulted in the previously existing socialist states. That means that along with the inspiring success you have to shoulder the failure of your tactics, and getting hijacked by revisionists who dismantled actually existing socialism is certainly a failure.

kek

maybe thats the goal anyways. i dont think this was happening until Holla Forums started bleeding users too. cant have you growing in strength in the meantime.

A ☭TANKIE☭ is anyone who doesn't believe the CIA is a trustworthy source regarding actually existing socialism.

I don't think there's anything wrong with Holla Forums being a recruitment ground so long as it isn't biased toward a particular school or tendency. But of course our B.O. is an autist so of course we can't have nice things.

Do you really need anymore proof that ☭TANKIE☭s are the worst thing to ever happen to the left? They're nothing but beta teenagers immersed in an authoritarian power fantasy with psychotic delusions of grandeur.

Mentally ill children who think the Stalinist regimes of the 20th century were good.

Confirmed newfag. You should have seen how much better the board was before the ☭TANKIE☭ infestation. M-Ls were incapable of competing, and they still aren't.

Do your think your own atrocious post ("guys, we just need a welfare state and more government regulation to escape the contradictions of capitalism!!") is competitive? You are the one whining like a baby about people who have a different opinion than you, but behave irrational and emotional yourself. You made some fallacious statements and got BTFO. Now, one day later, you revisit this thread to complain about mean ☭TANKIE☭s who keep correcting you on your bullshit. Pirate flag posters are the worst and 10 staunch anti-revisionist Hoxhaists are more valuable for the movement than 1000 adherents of your ilk.

Bruh, we have to fight tanks with tanks.

I'm not saying that we just need succdem shit, I'm saying market socialism doesn't necessarily need a completely free market.

Ironic given 90% of ☭TANKIE☭ posts consists of just that towards anarchists and red liberals (or what you think are red liberals).

How did I get BTFO? You never provided a single source for any of your claims about the USSR. There's no bullshit to correct, you claimed the USSR had all this great shit or didn't do inexcusably bad things their own records and the records of their victims very clearly confirm they did, and I called you out on that bullshit.

You should really read Marx "Poverty of Philosophy". It's online for free. I don't buy for a second you've read Marxist stuff, read refutations of it and then decided upon protracted contemplation that market socialism is the way to go and Marx critique of capitalism is unfounded. I think your beliefs result of ignorance of what communists actually have to say about capitalism.
Well you literally are one. You advocated for market "socialist" shit, SuccDem policies and cried about muh freedoms. At least AnComs aren't liberals, but you are a crypto-AnCap.
I didn't bother providing reading material because you would never read it, or attack the source. I would have done so if your claims were actually falsifiable (such as providing a number, a statistic or a concrete statement) but they were vague as shit, I asked you what civil liberties you meant, and you couldn't be arsed to specify it, instead you said it is not worthy talking about. You other claim was that the USSR didn't innovate which is so ridiculous in itself that you could just go to Wikipedia and look up Soviet and Chinese inventions. This is all baby tier.

How do you explain the fact that, by your logic, most people in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union are "mentally ill children"?

how many tanκie posts do I have to make before BO invites me to the Shining Path discord, or whatever you're recruiting for?

Marx wasn't a prophet, his work is important and ultimately useful, but it's not infallible. You can't just say "read Marx" as if that automatically makes you right.

I'm not really limiting myself to a particular tendency, I would be supportive of market socialism/mutualism, syndicalism/deleonism, communalism, and any other non Marxist-Leninist(-Maoist) tendency. My issue with central planning or what have you, is that the models of the 20th century have been proven crap, and no one has provided a detailed model for how to accomplish it in a way that will result in a raised quality of life for every prole, increased innovation, greater efficiancy, while at the same time preventing the planners from exploiting it for their own gain and becoming a new ruling class.

Oh I've read your sources and they conflict with easily obtained data from the USSR and its victims and often come form people with obvious agendas that are not qualified historians. I never said they didn't innovate I said the innovation was militaristic in nature rather domestic, when domestic technological advance is what improves quality of life.

The reason why Russians and some of the satellite states have majorities that want communism back is way more complicated then you ☭TANKIE☭s think it is. Obviously people why say M-L states were on the level of the most horrfying dystopian novels are truthful, but the issue is whether or not they were better than what liberals and succdems of all people achieved in the west. Several satellites were shafted by the shock treatment liberalization and understandably want a situation where they aren't screwed by mafia capitalism. Of course the ideal situation would be neither capitalism nor M-L, but some other tendency of socialism.

When Russians say they want communism back what they want is Stalin back, and they don;t want Stalin back because of his economic or civil liberties policy they want him back because he was a large than life strongman authority figure just like the Tsar, or Putin. Indeed the people who want another Stalin often express their love for the Nicholas and Putin despite the obvious ideological contradiction that represents.

The Eastern world was already used to being ruled by murderous despots. In much of the former USSR, what happened was they gained a lot of good and kept the same old bad.
It was no means ideal or even acceptable by our current standards, but these polls of former communist citizens are more significant than they sound. American cultural identity is partially founded on the assumption that these polls are wrong.

Yeah, I won't deny that M-L was an improvement over feudalism, but that's not my point.

YPG

Rojava

its not being supressed, just other voices are being heard.
before syria attracted any attention the threads were only visited by trots and r=java fanboys.
there was literally just a single opinion there, and now that theres more the original posters feel opressed.

It's funny because ☭TANKIE☭s used to be the most retarded posters (remember >it's not about fighting capitalism) while leftcoms were the only ones who read, until a few months ago when, to my surprise, the opposite trend started to emerge.
Tankies are state capitalists but it is good if we have a new bunch of more refined ones now. Well-read leftcoms need to come back though.

I didn't say he was nor did I make an appeal to authority. I brought up some concerns about market socialism such as the falling rate of profit, monopolization, labor market, accumulation of debt, etc. - these are the critiques communists make about markets, and I wonder if you have addressed them in your beliefs.
These plans have lifted a billion people out of poverty and transformed their society into a modern one. You talk about "domestic innovation", what do you mean by this? Can you name a type of good or technology that the people in the Eastern Bloc didn't have access to? Secondly, central planners are not exploiters. They don't constitute a ruling class.
So you attack the sources. I can argue that this is true for the anti-communist cesspit as well. Most people talking shit about the USSR are expats, many Russians who lived during that period will tell you a different story. Compared to what ex-communist countries have become, socialism clearly provided better for people than capitalism. If Marxism-Leninism can do this with poor countries, it would fare well with more developed countries.

It's been days now and this guy is still being so fucking butthurt, I can't seem to identify that I got "BTFO" anywhere, I don't endorse him being banned in the middle of a debate but it's been days now and he's still butthurt about a ban that isn't even permanent. Looks like I hit a spot there.

I don't have Twitter so can't respond but it sucks to be misrepresented.

And did all that without even attempting to establish anything related at all to socialism.

bat'ko if you're reading this idk if the answer to making a better board is splitting it

There needs to be a space before those words to activate the wordfilter.

rojava
YPG
DFNS
SDF
test

no, but you faggots tend to use the latter as a substitute for the former

it isn't

TFB, muke, Roo, every stupid fucking attention whore that spends more time making videos than reading for retards that will spend more time watching than reading gets the fucking bullet

With comrades like these, who needs COINTELPRO?

BO should allow embeds again to appease userbase

so I can post Propagandhi song

ps Chris Hannah is an obnoxious fucking liberal

user, I don't want to alarm you, but there may be a COINTELPRO agent or agents in the board

A "FACT" is that you are stealthily introducing a bunch of unspoken assumption.

For example, are you operating under assumption that each and every decision made by the general public needs to be 100% correct in hindsight, otherwise it was provably never Real Socialism(tm)? If so - please, clarify this beforehand.

Also, there is no need to pretend that I did not make it 100% clear that I consider the idea of Party having a negative influence to be a propaganda. Why do you feel the (rhetorical) need to ask this question?

That is a "FACT", as you say.

Magically? Spontaneously? Without any specific reason? And continued doing the same over and over again?

Listen to yourself. You are just like AnCap, who can look only on the stick of the State, never noticing the Capitalists wielding it.

Substituting the actual position with the one it is easier to argue with is called "Strawmanning".

I was talking about Party, not Politburo, my little liar. And I never suggest such an overly simplistic way as "more power".

Arguments, please.

Yes, of course. Let's just pretend that the whole of Soviet Union was one monolithic uniform entity. Then everything becomes so SIMPLE, right? No need to understand the actual mechanism of Revisionism, nor scavenge the documents for any facts. We can blame it all on Party. Or Planned Economy. Or Stalin.

In fact, we can blame it on practically anything this way. After all, since USSR was one single entity, it automatically incorporates everything that was part of it. It's a wonderfully effective approach. Also - useless, unless your only intent is to discard everything related to USSR.

I'm sorry, what this supposed to imply? Are you trying to prove that this was good, or that this was bad? What context are you using?

Get real. Politburo included people who wielded a lot of influence outside of Politburo. I.e. it was not power of Politburo - but of people who were part of it.

Please, make a coherent statement, not a bunch of factoids that supposedly mean something.

Again, you relying on associative "reasoning" here, not an actual thinking.

Your version is completely not self-contradictory.

It's not that I am blind, it's just there is nothing to see. You quote a bunch of stuff out of context and use fallacious reasoning to argue your point - which is an incoherent mess.

Would you mind having a separate thread where we will discuss if Party is necessary after the Revolution? Where you can present your actual position in full?

First and foremost, Planned Economy provably got rolled back. I.e. this was not "status quo" - not in the way both you now and Khrushchev in the 1950s argue.
Secondly, at least half of population (well into 50s) was working in farming sector, and was outside of Planned Economy.

Yes. Except Planning was still controlled by a minority - not general public (as is necessary for stable situation). And this minority was heavily dependent on government (and Party) constantly guiding and improving it. Except that didn't happen.

Why, looking at things as processes, of course. For example the very thing that we argue about: Planning.

Both Khrushchev (in his propaganda) and you treat Planned Economy as some absolute state. IRL it is a process that evolves and changes. Consequently, you can't preserve Planning, you can only constantly improve and develop it - or have it degenerate.

The second you start pretending that it is something immutable, you stop improving it - and it starts degenerating, whether you notice it or not.

This, except even "against" is poorly defined.

Mainstream LeftCom - in my opinion - seems to be Council Communism (who are halfway Anarchists), not Bordigists (who are mostly Leninist with somewhat unrealistic expectations).

Indirect support of Fascism through diluting Socialist position, of course.

...

You mean, it's not dissatisfaction with market economy?

Third way. National "Socialism". We've been there already, ffs.

< slave mentality
Look closely, kids. This is what bona fide Fascist looks like.

No, Stalin is not supported because of "strongman authority figure", but because people want to deal away with corruption and Capitalisms. They want State to function in their interests. That is what they want. Only Fascist scum attempts to substitute this with dictator who will bestow happiness to people from on high.

Bullshit. Only Putin has some overlap - and he has it because the vocal opposition to him is so retardedly Right-wing, only morons would support it.

...

Anti-tankies are ☭TANKIE☭s who haven't read enough books. Check out "Foundations of Leninism" by J.V. Stalin.

...

The satellite photos merely confirm defector testimonies, though. Now, I'm perfectly willing to agree that defectors from the North exaggerate their stories but third party witnesses at the border, the heavily scarred bodies of the defectors and the sad tale of Otto Warmbier paint a picture that much of the accusations are true.

Which side are you referring to here

FinnBol is objectively the best Marxist YouTuber until he arrives at the topics of Stalin, Trotsky, and Catalonia. Especially with Trotsky he just loses his mind and any ability to be calm and rational. Really couldn't tell you why.

idk why you are surprised that bat'ko would be upset he got banned in the middle of a debate for using sources the BO doesn't like.

Anyways this whole thing is massively depressing. I don't really use this board that much any more, but it was one of the few places on the internet that actually had decent discussion and put a decent face forward for the left. I remember after getting banned from /r/socialism I was seriously considering abandoning leftist beliefs, not because I felt they were wrong but because I hated the type of people who seemed to be associated with them.

I came to this board and was given the Marx reading list, a ton of other theory and given help understanding it. The fact here that people weren't retarded SJW authoritarians made me realize that not all leftists were garbage people and inspired me to get involved with a leftist org irl.

Now this place is going downhill falling into the same ban happy patterns we /r/socialism and will soon be dominated by apologists for Stalin and North Korea.

This makes me sad one of the last place on the internet that puts a good face forward for socialism will be lost and the next person that comes here will probably come to the conclusion that leftists are just delusional, authoritarian children.

Can one ☭TANKIE☭ honestly explain to me why leftists in the West should make an effort to tie ourselves to the 20th century socialist experiments is? Like I don't even want to get into a debate about whether they were good or bad, just explain what tying ourselves to them is meant to achieve strategically.

If you are from the periphery of Europe or the third world absolutely be a ☭TANKIE☭ it is probably a good political strategy as the USSR is highly regarded by many in those regions. Regardless any ☭TANKIE☭ movement in the core capitalist countries will get nowhere people here have a hopelessly warped view on the USSR and no amount of agitprop will change that. It is completely written into the DNA of anglo society. ☭TANKIE☭s seem hell bent on dominating leftist internet discourse and if they do it will seriously hamper leftist movement in the most strategically important core capitalist countries (Germany, France, Britain, and the US).

recommendations for further reading?

Capitalism in the First World, socialism in the Third World. Dialectics :^)

Gosh I hope he does that.

What happened to this being a place for the left as a whole?

youtube.com/watch?v=BYVes44hcJg

Based Parenti with the correct analysis of the USSR. Will appeal to ☭TANKIE☭s and anarkiddies alike.

wtf happened to you in general?

I seriously wonder if there is some kind of cointelpro type scheme to shit up leftist internet communities through gaining control of moderation by paying/blackmailing the old moderators. It would be such an easy and cheap way to massively undercut the left.

I hope that one day you'll stop being a sperg trying to enforce his shitty opinions on the entire board, but I already know we can't have nice things in life.

I try not to buy into Holla Forums-tier conspiracies of victimization but that would make a lot of sense

One easy argument is that ML is the only experiment that was even remotely successful.
Ancoms were BTFO unilaterally. Utopians failed. Dem Succ killed Rosa and then failed miserably.

The thing is Jim Profit already warned all of you about moderators, but most of you chose to laugh at him and disregard what he had to say. Even now with the BO drama most here would actually rather blame ML posters than identify the fucking moderators as the problem. As if ML posters have any control of what the BO does, or even so much as any sway. This was the future you chose

What even is this shit about? All I know is that a couple E-celebs got buttmad.

This literally doesn't address what I was saying at all. Even if you want to follow Marxist-Leninist praxis how is associating ourselves with the USSR a good strategy it is a recipe for stagnation in the advanced capitalist countries.

Also this line of argument is retarded it's literally liberal-tier reasoning. "Communism has never existed therefore its impossible, communists btfo." You could have gone and told lenin in 1916, there has never been a successful Marxist-leninist revolution therefore its impossible for there to ever build socialism using the ML model.

I don't blame ML for the board drama. ML have taught me a lot on this board and I've embraced quite a lot of their views. I believe the USSR was socialist and that it was a massive step forward for the international working class that should be venerated, I just dispute the prudence of leading with this in our pitch to normies. Afaik most people become socialist first, then begin to see through anti-communist propaganda. ML provide added balance to the board and a valuable point of view to the board. I just hope people recognize that other tendencies do as well and that banning them will just make this place sterile and boring.

My point is essentially that we're going to be associated with those in history who closest resemble us whether we like it or not. Not saying you have to be ML but do you want the modern left to be seen as the second coming of either a failed state that lost the only war it ever fought, a band of hoodlums running around Ukraine or the country that beat Hitler? The latter of the three is very effective, from a propoganda perspective, if we're able to despook the public about the lies surrounding the USSR.

The latter of the three got taken over by revisionists and was broken apart to give us some oligarch run shitholes. Sure it did some nice things but like the other failures it is lying in the graveyard. Respect the grave but leave it there and move on.

The idea that we are ever going to do this is ridiculous. People become despooked about the USSR after they become socialists not the other way around. The only way the USSR will ever be viewed in a positive light by the cultural mainstream is if we build a new socialist movement and transform our societies. Even then it will probably be at best seen as a deeply flawed but noble experiment kind of like how Parenti describes it in .

The best thing we can do is portray ourselves as a new movement with new ideas not dwell on the past.

That's a more agreeable stance, if you apply it to all three. I'd support a move to new movements as long as the failure of anarchism is acknowledged as well. That model wasn't viable in the first place and even less now that every imperialist nation on earth has an army of ideologically enslaved lumpens and a disparity of military power so laughable that the OG Leninist model isn't even viable anymore.

That depends, the bourgeoisie have been able to pull the wool of the eyes of the proletariat so profoundly that despooking them at all makes the USSR topic kind of pale in comparison.

Most working class people are quite open to Socialist ideas. I used to work at a moving company and it was very common for the workers to apply a proto-marxist labour theory of value to our work there, talking about how much each worker would make if our boss wasn't siphoning so much of it off. There was also a large amount of anti-elite sentiment among the workers. If most people were exposed to the marxist theories of class it would be quite easy to build a mass socialist movement, there is just a massive fail of communication and organization on the part of the left.

By contrast most people view the USSR as a military dictatorship and it's very hard to convince them otherwise. Convince someone to be a socialist is 100x easier than convincing them the USSR was good.

The fact that Americans thought Bernie was a socialist and then connected him with Stalin kind of debunks that.

I do, all three were noble experiments but all three should be considered failures that we need to move on for.
On the contrary I'd argue that the development of communication has negated the traditional weaknesses of anarchist militias, and that a group of well-trained militas could potentially be more effective and less in danger of treason or infiltration than a standing army, especially if they can grab military turncoats and disaffected veterans. The ultimate issue for any leftist sect or even an implausible unified left is spooked proles though. An organization or network of organizations is needed for this, and I do not see any sect up to this challenge at the present time.

Peak consistency.

Woo boy. You realize the Americans and the Russians are both capable of running their militarizes with type writers and satellite after EMP-ing themselves in the case of such a thing, correct?

This will literally never happen, the US uses everything it can to get as close to literal mind control of the military as possible.

There's nothing in there inconsistsnt bucko.
They are about as likely to emp themselves as nuke themselves given the damage it would do to infrastructure. Our main advantage is the fear porky has of destroying potential property and as such the heavily reduced likelihood of emp or nuke killing off a revolutionary force. This isn't even to touch on how unpredictable EMPs are, though I suppose stopping 3 out of 37 cars could be potentially dangerous.
Burger vets come out of service as burnt outs and quite a few serving end up hating it. While there certainly is a large reactionary presence there, we would be fools to assume they come out as enthusiasts of capitalism, especially the non-white ones for whatever reason.

American's thought Bernie was a socialist because he said he was. Also no one but the worst type of ultra-reactionary rightwingers made a bona fide connection between him and Stalin, the small minority who did that are unreachable using any strategy.

"I agree the anarchist experiment was a failure"
"Anarchism is good"
Gotem.

Porky is more likely to EMP himself rather than die.

Vets are physchologically damaged and borderline useless at even being a human being, those in the service are programmed to drone for Porky until they become the former, this is by design.

You underestimate the raw power of the ideology within and the extent of the lumpens in America, half the country still supports Trump, tried to elect a pedophillic tenther because of his religion, etc.

The best chance at revolution the globe has is if Russia manages to fuck itself and launch the Satan II or Yellowstone goes off.

how will tanks recover

If height meant anything wouldn't we all be succ dems right now?

There are restrictions on max height for tank crews in USSR, did you not know this?

Why would he destroy valuable property if he thinks he can retake it? Do you not realize capitalism is built off of narcissism yet?

This is a shitty defeatist attitude to take for society and one of the root causes behind the current proliferation of mental illness (lol just go to a professhional, they solve everything!!!!).

Of course, men with less default body-mass get gains easier. Tall-fags are usually too spindly for the revolution.

A good tank still requires good infantry support.

Porky already thinks the modern world is basically over. They're all buying bunkers at this point Anything they can squeeze from us until the climate or Yellowstone finish the proles off is just more surplus. A few years shaved off that is nothing to them.

Your enemy is stronger than you, smarter than you, and better organized. Make your peace with what fighting him would take.

The failure of Catalonia and the Ukranian Free Territory was no more a failure of Anarchism than the USSR's dismemberment was a failure of Marxism or Napolean was a failure of Liberalism.
That requires him to believe that he will die, in the short-term he will be too concerned with profits to take out much of the infrastrucutre to drop the emp.
I've met quite a few and this isn't the majority or even common among the 2000fags.

...

He believes that because of climate change, not because an immenent revolution. If you've already concluded porky is going to kill us off I don't know why you're here instead of drinking yourself to death.

Drunkeness is personally demeaning.

I hope that one day Bat'ko and the other leftcoms/anarchists will stop thinking Henry Kissinger is a trustworthy source about socialism.

Most people in South Korea thought the same about North Korea. All it took was one massive corruption scandal to discredit the South Korean right and their anti-North Korean narrative- the result is that a massive percentage of South Korean are openly pro-North, including the recently elected president Moon Jae In.

If the ruling elite's legitimacy is completely discredited, their narratives will also be discredited.

Because it is brought up every fucking time you are trying to explain socialism to someone, it usually takes the average liberal one minute to go "hurr works well on paper but not in practice check Soviet Union checkmate". From that point on, you have two options: To say every socialist project that was tried in history actually isn't "real socialism" or to try to explain them how it was successful and the shortcomings can be explained by looking at the material conditions.

In my experience, the "not real socialism" crowd is laughed out of the room, whereas ☭TANKIE☭s who defend these states are not. The reason why people think the former stance is disingenuous is because it is righteously seen as an attempt to dissociate yourself from past adherents of your ideology that tried to put it into practice. It doesn't matter to people what the definition of socialism is, it matters that it was tried and has led to a specific set of results. ☭TANKIE☭s might be hated by the mainstream for defending Marxist-Leninist states but at least they are straightforward, they can hardly be called utopians when things they advocate are palpable in real life. Someone like Parenti would fare well in debates.

In my opinion, the complete opposite is true of what your are saying, in fact, the "not real socialism" crowd, especially the one that is not very educated on the subject, is harmful to the left. I personally get accused of pulling off "not real socialism" when I try to explain to somebody how Venezuela has 70% private economy. Accusing somebody of the "not real socialism" fallacy hasn't become a meme because the right kept saying it, it became a meme because tons of western leftist kept unironically saying this ad nauseum.

Racism or idealism? You can just never tell.

Literally brought the country out of absolute destitution. What arguments do you have against that? Do you think everyone is stupid and pathetic? Don't be ridiculous and make a modicum of effort to hide your disdain for working people.

There is a difference between defending the USSR against liberal propaganda, and citing Grover Furr to prove that Stalin was the second coming of Jesus.
Likewise there is a difference between explaining why North Korea does the things they do like the nuclear programme from a historical and IR-theory perspective and calling out all the absurd bullshit Western media and the defectors spout about it, and saying that it is real, existing socialism that should be emulated.
And so on, and so on. Nuance and analysis instead of bullish circling of wagons around the red flag, especially when dealing with non-leftists. Even the most battle-hardened IS-3 should understand that promoting some real-world society or persons as perfectly rational or perfectly functional is a distortion and very unconvincing. Modern socialism and revolution would look very different to 1917 Russia or CPC during the civil war, especially in the West where most posters on the board try to agitate.
polite sage for edit

You do realize South Korea will literally jail them if they will not cooperate?

I don't watch Youtube, but I have to ask: what is not to your liking?

I'm sorry, if you still can't come to grips with the fact that America is not the most democratic country in the world (which is the basis for perpetuating "Stalin was a dictator" nonsense) and that there are people who are escaping into North Korea (some even do it from Russia - a pair of trade union activists did it recently, once local oligarch started using their kid to put pressure on them).

Practically speaking: not becoming Third World. You are operating under assumption that First World is qualitatively different from Third. That is but a temporary condition. See the recent UN report of Alabama, for example.

Recent polls indicate a different story, when it comes to young generation.

But there is no non-tankie Left. The only proposed alternative is 卐Third Way卐

Also this. Very strongly this.

Lanklets make better targets though. Likely they also require more food because of their poor nogains metabolism. Let's face it, being tall is bourgeois decadence and it can be stamped out as shown by the DPRK and their relentless campaign to consolidate the people's height at optimal levels. Cutting the tall blades of grass is less of a metaphor than you would think.

oh no

big man is a small man with a tall can of flaws
-t. mc ride

Moon Jae In is an American puppet.

My mistake, you are not a ☭TANKIE☭ just a cryto-liberal.

This is how I deal with this question. I don't really understand how this addresses my point. You can make this argument without adopting soviet aesthetics, explicitly identifying with the Soviet project, and being a hardcore apologist for the, very real, deficiencies of "real existing socialism." Those are the three things I associate with ☭TANKIE☭'s, not measured responses explaining how the shortcomings of the USSR resulted from underdeveloped productive forces and capitalist encirclement . Like I said earlier in this thread, I believe the USSR was socialist and there was a lot of progress under the leadership of the party I simply question the wisdom of ideologically and aesthetically identifying ourselves with the USSR in the West's capitalist core.

You're creating a false dichotomy between the "not true socialism" crowd and the "identify with the USSR ideologically and aesthetically to the max" crowd. We should spend as little time talking about the USSR as possible (outside assessing its successes and failures analytically obviously).

The third world is pro-ussr because its foreign policy was consistently oriented towards national liberation for the colonialized and helping countries free themselves from US domination. Freedom of speech, religion, and electoral "democracy" are also not valued in the third world the same way they are in the west.

Western hostility towards the USSR results from a combination of brainwashing by a highly developed capitalist mass media and the USSR being the West's main geopolitical enemy for 50 years. There is also the fact that the USSR did not accord people the type of political freedoms people value highly in Western countries inb4 Westerner's didn't have any extra freedoms compared to the USSR.

The hostility results from an ideological apparatus, geopolitics, and culture not material conditions and it will not change with them.

Please point me to polls showing Western millennials have a high opinion of the USSR. High opinion of socialism =/= high opinion of the USSR.

Only the most extremely online brainlet would think this.

Both of y'all, honestly.

I get it, you guys've got some significant ideological differences, but all that's done is split the left into a patchwork of fiefdoms. The same thing happened between the USSR and Yugoslavia, the USSR and China, China and Vietnam; the list goes on, like infighting is our pastime. By refusing to compromise with one another, these states forced their comrades to strike out on their own, and look how that's turned out for all the four that I've mentioned.

Can't you shelve it for now? Both positions would have different appeals in different cultures/countries. We'll have plenty of time to vilify each other once our common enemy is defeated.

It honestly should have been a permanent ban.
The guy is exactly the sort childish anarchist that has done so much damage to this board over the years.
No the mention that he has surrounded himself in a bubble of equally childish SJW anarchists that are literally from reddit.

The less reddit cancer this board has the better.

You must not have been here during the anarcho-kiddy invasion early in this boards life.
Those faggots wanted to ban anyone that was not an ultra lifestylist, SJW, illigalist anarchist.
When they did not get their way, they had a tantrum and made their own irrelevant little board.
Now that was some COINTELPRO shit.

Probably one of the best posts the BO has made.

As long as I don't discuss certain topics, I'm still allowed here.
I honestly don't see how you could not still think of Holla Forums as an umbrella community when even a non-socialist such as myself is still more or less tolerated.

While the BO has indeed done a number of dumb/pointlessly hostile things recently, that does not change the fundamentals of this board.
All that has happened is that the M-Ls that were once the majority of this board came out of exile from /marx/ and drove off some of the most obnoxious anarchists.

What this has to do with anything? I am talking about US not becoming impoverished hellhole most of the Third World is.

You really should try to use non-meme words. What the hell does "tankie" mean for you?

How are you going to abolish capitalism? Through abolition of state and creation of AnCap paradise?

A ☭TANKIE☭ is an apologist for the deficiencies of the USSR, typically a marxist-leninist, and someone who thinks the moder left should identify with the USSR ideologically and aesthetically. This is a pretty typical definition both on this board and in leftist circles. People started referring to USSR apoligists as ☭TANKIE☭s after the defended sending in the tanks to deal with socialist dissidents in 1956 Hungary and 1968 Czechoslovakia.

It seems like you're arguing on a totally different plane than me and think being a ☭TANKIE☭ is synonymous with supporting socialism. Idk why you are entering into arguments when you don't even understand what is being discussed, lurk moar faggot.

The thing is western imperialism overshadows the crimes of the Comecon. The Grenztruppen of the GDR killed 132 people in the entire history of Berlin Wall, in comparison in 2016 alone 322 were killed trying to cross the US/Mexico boarder yet Western apologists ignores this while continuing to portray the Comecon as blood thirsty monsters. Thus it is no wonder why there is nostalgia for the Comecon and it better to just acknowledge the problem with the Comecon the condemn those that views the Comecon as being more humane then US imperialism.