• Drusas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      98
      arrow-down
      13
      ·
      16 hours ago

      Seriously. Tankies are authoritarians who consider themselves leftists.

        • Mr Fish@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          63
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          14 hours ago

          Only on the political compass, which uses a definition of left vs right that a lot of leftists disagree with. Really, the entire history of “left wing” politics has been about questioning and dismantling authority. The terms “left wing” and “right wing” come from the French revolution, when the people in favour of simply reforming the monarchy sat on the right side of the room, while the people who wanted to fully dismantling the monarchy sat on the left. A lot of more modern leftist thought is about questioning the power that capitalist businesses have.

          • deranger@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 hours ago

            Well said. Still; can you not have authoritarian left and libertarian left viewpoints? I just don’t see how questioning the power capitalist businesses have is limited to the libertarian left.

            What’s wrong with the definition of left & right on the political compass? I’m not super tuned into political science but this is the first I’ve heard that many leftists have take issue with it. I have seen the authoritarian left referred to as “red fascists”, but do they not also take issue with the power capitalist businesses have?

            I suppose I’d consider myself a left libertarian. The power of the state should be limited and what power is granted to the state should be used to improve the life of the people.

            • Mr Fish@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              9 hours ago

              can you not have auth left and lib left viewpoints?

              Yes, but actually no. The distinction is fundamentally unstable. If the left is constantly questioning power structures, it will inevitably turn to whatever structure the auth left comes up with.

              what’s wrong with the definition of left and right on the political compass?

              It’s specially economic left/right, which is almost always defined by taxation, government spending, and social welfare. While leftists usually say social welfare is a good thing, it’s not changing the fundamentals of how capitalism works, which is the current dominant power structure that leftists are against.

              do auth left not also take issue with the power capitalist businesses have?

              Yes, but they usually put something just as bad in its place. You might have heard people saying that the USSR was “state capitalist rather than communist”. This means that the workers and customers had just as little say in how things are run than they would under capitalists, only is was directly with the state rather than individual business owners.

          • j_overgrens@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            8 hours ago

            Worthwile to note here that the left of the French revolution, the Jacobins, did develop authoritarianism.

            Which should have been a warning sign for all leftists to come, but alas…

      • Riverside@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        19
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Tankies support systems that have brought about immense increases in life expectancy, worker’s rights, women’s rights, free healthcare, free education, and literally defeated fascism. It’s still baffling to me that in 2026, witnessing the descent to fascism of the west (Trump, Meloni LePen, AfD, Vox…) you’re still so threatened by Chinese socialists who literally don’t have a fascist party or by the Soviet socialists who literally saved Europe from Nazism.

        • gmtom@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 hours ago

          support systems that have brought about immense increases in life expectancy, worker’s rights, women’s rights, free healthcare, free education, and literally defeated fascism

          Cool, you can make literally that exact same argument about capitalist neo libs.

          • Riverside@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            11 hours ago

            France got liberated thanks to the Soviets too, we’re talking all of Europe here.

            In the rest of places, as I said, replacing it by a system with full free healthcare, worker’s rights, respect of minorities and their languages and cultures, free education to the highest level, anti-imperialism and industrial development and self-reliance. The dismantling of the Eastern Block is the biggest demographic catastrophe in Europe since WW2.

            • j_overgrens@feddit.nl
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              8 hours ago

              Worthwile to note that the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany were longstanding allies before Operation Barbarossa and a critical amount of steel and oil that supplied the Nazi war machine after the allied embargo was supplied by the Soviet union.

              Which says nothing of the monumental sacrifice given by Soviet civilians, but let’s separate that from Stalin’s policy, perhaps?

            • Tja@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              6 hours ago

              Anti imperialism? How did they become the largest country on earth?

              Respect of minorities? Tell that to the tens of thousands of people executed in forests. Or starved to death. Because of their identity.

              Industrial development? Yes, current Russia having an economy the size of Italy is a testament to that.

              Plenty of countries have free education and Healthcare.

              • Riverside@reddthat.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                6 hours ago

                Anti imperialism? How did they become the largest country on earth?

                Imperialism is not when big country, believe it or not. Imperialism is about having peripheral colonies from which you extract raw materials and where the citizens have fewer rights, and a core which benefits from the labor of the rest of the periphery. The USSR engaged in the opposite by providing raw materials and energy inputs to the Eastern-Block countries at subsidized prices precisely with the intention of helping them industrialize and develop. As an example, the GDP per capita of Estonia was 20% higher than that of the Russian republic during the USSR.

                Respect of minorities?

                Yes. Ukraine got its borders and political representation for the first time in history during Soviet rule. You may be surprised to find that Rosa Luxembourg argued against this, there are some fun letters between her and Lenin where the latter argued in favour of supporting the national identity of Ukrainians. This was carried out as soon as the revolution took place, in the Korenizatsiya policy of boosting ethnic minorities once oppressed by the Russian empire. You may be surprised to learn that Stalin was the commissar for nationalities when the Russian Revolution happened. The communists elected a Georgian leader in 1925, unthinkable just 10 years prior.

                All republics in the USSR had the right to determine their own languages, and people had a right to an education in these languages up to university level (not always included). The majority of books and newspapers printed in areas with national languages different to Russian were in said languages (Ukrainian, Kazakh, Armenian, Georgian, Estonian…). You can get informed about this in Albert Szymanski’s “human rights in the Soviet Union”. There were big mistakes during a few years due to hysteria against Nazism and Japanese invasion (see deportations of Crimean Tatars and Koreans), but other than that the USSR has a mostly impeccable record in this regard. Compare that to France murdering 1 million Algerians in the 1960s in the Algerian war of independence, or with Occitan language becoming almost extint in the 20th century.

                Industrial development? Yes, current Russia

                The USSR was at the time the second largest economy in the world, idk why you compare it with modern capitalist Russia, of course capitalism destroyed the progress achieved by socialists.

      • Riverside@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        11 hours ago

        Tell me which actually existing, relevant, long-lasting leftist projects you support and how they’re further to the left than Cuba.

    • Riverside@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      Oh, cool, tell me what historically successful, relevant and long-lasting leftist movements you support! Wait, you don’t support any actually existing leftism…?