39
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by manuallybreathing@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 months ago

When does Communism become authoritarian? Like, where in the process?

[-] Samvega@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 5 months ago

I never said that Communism necessarily becomes authoritarian. But, as someone who has a strong dislike for authoritarianism, I'm not interested in Communism which involves it.

[-] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 points 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@beehaw.org 3 points 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@lemmy.ml 2 points 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 1 points 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@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 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.

this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2024
39 points (62.0% liked)

Asklemmy

43950 readers
1116 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS