Comment on .ml has got to be the only place on earth where I'd get downvoted for a comment like this
CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 5 hours agoWho cares? I’m not talking about how they get solidified. I’m talking about what they do when they have power. If someone supports violent left wing regimes, then they are a Tankie. If you don’t think that the regimes are violent beyond their revolutions, then that wouldn’t imply one way or another whether you are a Tankie.
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 hours ago
So we are back to square one: since all leftist states are the result of revolution, it is definitionally correct that “tankies” are those who support socialist states. All states are tools by which the ruling classes retain their dominance, in socialism this is the working class. Therefore, all states are inherently violent, and trying to label some as uniquely violent misses the entire point of the state, a monopoly on violence.
CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 5 hours ago
No. I explicitly rejected that interpretation in the very comment you are responding to. Can you read?
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 5 hours ago
Yes, of course I can read. You rejected my interpretation, and I very clearly explained how your rejection is baseless. What is a “non-violent leftist regime?”
CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 5 hours ago
No. That’s not what happened. I rejected the idea that having a violent revolution makes a regime violent by definition. This whole time I’ve been talking about regimes and you’ve been talking about revolutions. It’s really that simple of a miscommunication.