While I don’t disagree with you, if you didn’t subscribe to the fact that authoritarians have coopted far left movements to consolidate power, it does look like you are doing a false equivalency to make a “both sides” argument. And “both sides” arguments frequently get downvoted.
.ml has got to be the only place on earth where I'd get downvoted for a comment like this
Submitted 2 months ago by taygaloocat@leminal.space to mildlyinfuriating@lemmy.world
Comments
qarbone@lemmy.world 2 months ago
goldfndr@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
While yes, there is arguably a “both sides” argument, it has been done without a false equivalency – nowhere did OP claim that the sides were equal.
qarbone@lemmy.world 2 months ago
… The “equivalency”, that is potentially false, is that both parties promote dictators as leaders/heads of state. “False equivalence” is a flexible term and doesn’t just mean “two political parties are equal”.
lbfgs@programming.dev 2 months ago
Marxist-Leninist ideology explicitly calls for the dictatorship of the proletariat. I wouldn’t want it either, but this is basically like going to a religious forum and advocating atheism (i.e. pointless).
merdaverse@lemmy.zip 2 months ago
You don’t seem to understand what Marx means by dictatorship of the proletariat. His idea of implementation of the dictatorship of the proletariat was the Paris Commune, which had universal suffrage, elected and immediately recallable delegates (a better and more democratic concept that the political clownshow we have in parliamentary democracy). I suggest reading past the name of the concept before talking nonsense.
lbfgs@programming.dev 2 months ago
Marxism is not the same as Marxism-Leninism. Marx might have had Paris commune as his idea of dictatorship of the proletariat, though it was all theoretical. Lenin’s take was the first implementation of the idea which was way more hardline (Red Terror) as seen in incidents like the purge of the Left SRs.
Whether Lenin’s actions were justified it’s a different matter (and tankies will certainly say they were) but ironically Tankies typically won’t dispute that Lenin wasn’t dictatorial. Rather, often they will point to talking points taken out of What is to be done? to justify why those actions were needed (i.e. the official CPSU party line).
TrickDacy@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Except for the fact that you don’t have to “go” anywhere. You just have to not notice a domain name. I think it’s admirable for people to assume most people aren’t psychotic extremists rather than assume, if you don’t check which instance something is posted to, then they probably are.
SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Saying the Soviet Union, Khmer Rogue and Mao were examples of bad leftist authoritarianism will get you banned from stuff there too.
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
One of these things is absolutely not like the other two, supporting the Khmer Rouge is more likely to get you banned than not. Saying the USSR and PRC are bad is just generic anti-communism.
SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Talk to people who actually lived in those countries and the cultural revolution.
Tolc@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Soviet union and mao were good
Khmer rogue was backed by CIA
Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 2 months ago
Deng: Mao was at least 20% bad. I don’t think I need to list Deng’s mistakes. Or mention Hu Jintao.
The USSR beat the Nazis, turned hundreds of millions of farmers living under feudalism into a space-based civilization with living standards comparable to the west within a single lifetime, and materially supported positive social movements all over the planet, but if you want to talk about any particular period, I can talk about things that in hindsight weren’t great, even with proper context.
Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 2 months ago
Yeah no if you’re calling the Khmer Rouge, whom authoritarian communist, Ho Chi Minh, kicked out and the US armed and supported in exile until the 90s, an example of leftists, no shit you’ll get banned, clearly you’re not there to have an actual discussion.
As far as the USSR and Mao, communist circles tend to have much deeper understanding and criticisms of these things because we actually engage with what actually happened, why it happened, it’s effects, how it’s perceived by modern historians, etc, as opposed to liberals who don’t actually care beyond its utility in jerking off while grunting “communism bad”.
GrammarPolice@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Stfu. USSR and China weren’t communist
EuroNutellaMan@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
I find it kinda funny how, according to replies to this, their problem with supporting the Khmer Rouge is that it was US-backed.
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
Nah, the problem was that it wasn’t even close to socialism, and instead was a sort of reactionary agrarian system with brutal repressions. It was stopped by the communists. Pointing out that the US Empire backed it is to prove the point that it absolutely wasn’t leftist, and that “tankies” don’t support it.
BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Ah, hardcore commies. The level of density is incredible.
Their mentality is like:
Mao starved 10x the holocaust number of people but it’s okay, because it was unintentional!
GuyIncognito@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
Holocaust revisionism. typical.
NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I think it just depends on which estimates you go off of. No one knows exactly how many people died in each, and while 10x is definitely pushing it, 5x would be more reasonable.
SippyCup@lemmy.world 2 months ago
The problem is that the specific argument you point to is often brought up either in complete ignorance or straight up bad faith. Communism bad, look at (insert one of like, 5 events here)
But let’s ignore the untold millions slaughtered, enslaved, or maimed in the name of profit.
BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world 2 months ago
The problem is that the specific argument you point to is often brought up either in complete ignorance or straight up bad faith. Communism bad, look at (insert one of like, 5 events here)
But let’s ignore the untold millions slaughtered, enslaved, or maimed in the name of profit.
The problem with your argument is that it can be applied to anything.
“This specific argument is often brought up either in complete ignorance or straight up bad faith. Nazism bad, look at (insert one of like, 5 events here)”
I could even sprinkle that turd with: “It wasn’t Real National Socialsm! Actual National Socialsm has never been tried!”
taygaloocat@leminal.space 2 months ago
Totally, we can see socialist systems that work well alongside the free market, most of Scandinavia, Australia, Czech Republic, etc We’ve got the answers, we should just aspire to implement similar policies that actually work
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml 1 month ago
A) you pulled that number out of your ass, you don’t have a clue what you’re talking about B) even if A weren’t true the actual real life number of people killed by capitalism blows it out of the water and they do it on purpose
I’ll take well intentioned mistakes over gleeful evil any day
guerilla_ontologist@lemmy.world 2 months ago
terms like ‘authoritarian’ and ‘dictator’ are meaningless, invented by postwar westerners to equate fascism and communism, thus perpetuating the infamous and academically recognized ‘double genocide’ myth created by nazis (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_genocide_theory)
from Engel’s On Authority (www.marxists.org/archive/marx/…/authority.htm)
A number of Socialists have latterly launched a regular crusade against what they call the principle of authority. It suffices to tell them that this or that act is authoritarian for it to be condemned. This summary mode of procedure is being abused to such an extent that it has become necessary to look into the matter somewhat more closely.
Authority, in the sense in which the word is used here, means: the imposition of the will of another upon ours; on the other hand, authority presupposes subordination. Now, since these two words sound bad, and the relationship which they represent is disagreeable to the subordinated party, the question is to ascertain whether there is any way of dispensing with it, whether — given the conditions of present-day society — we could not create another social system, in which this authority would be given no scope any longer, and would consequently have to disappear.
On examining the economic, industrial and agricultural conditions which form the basis of present-day bourgeois society, we find that they tend more and more to replace isolated action by combined action of individuals. Modern industry, with its big factories and mills, where hundreds of workers supervise complicated machines driven by steam, has superseded the small workshops of the separate producers; the carriages and wagons of the highways have become substituted by railway trains, just as the small schooners and sailing feluccas have been by steam-boats. Even agriculture falls increasingly under the dominion of the machine and of steam, which slowly but relentlessly put in the place of the small proprietors big capitalists, who with the aid of hired workers cultivate vast stretches of land.
Everywhere combined action, the complication of processes dependent upon each other, displaces independent action by individuals. But whoever mentions combined action speaks of organisation; now, is it possible to have organisation without authority?
Supposing a social revolution dethroned the capitalists, who now exercise their authority over the production and circulation of wealth. Supposing, to adopt entirely the point of view of the anti-authoritarians, that the land and the instruments of labour had become the collective property of the workers who use them. Will authority have disappeared, or will it only have changed its form? Let us see.
Let us take by way of example a cotton spinning mill. The cotton must pass through at least six successive operations before it is reduced to the state of thread, and these operations take place for the most part in different rooms. Furthermore, keeping the machines going requires an engineer to look after the steam engine, mechanics to make the current repairs, and many other labourers whose business it is to transfer the products from one room to another, and so forth. All these workers, men, women and children, are obliged to begin and finish their work at the hours fixed by the authority of the steam, which cares nothing for individual autonomy. The workers must, therefore, first come to an understanding on the hours of work; and these hours, once they are fixed, must be observed by all, without any exception. Thereafter particular questions arise in each room and at every moment concerning the mode of production, distribution of material, etc., which must be settled by decision of a delegate placed at the head of each branch of labour or, if possible, by a majority vote, the will of the single individual will always have to subordinate itself, which means that questions are settled in an authoritarian way. The automatic machinery of the big factory is much more despotic than the small capitalists who employ workers ever have been. At least with regard to the hours of work one may write upon the portals of these factories: Lasciate ogni autonomia, voi che entrate! [Leave, ye that enter in, all autonomy behind!]
If man, by dint of his knowledge and inventive genius, has subdued the forces of nature, the latter avenge themselves upon him by subjecting him, in so far as he employs them, to a veritable despotism independent of all social organisation. Wanting to abolish authority in large-scale industry is tantamount to wanting to abolish industry itself, to destroy the power loom in order to return to the spinning wheel.
Let us take another example — the railway. Here too the co-operation of an infinite number of individuals is absolutely necessary, and this co-operation must be practised during precisely fixed hours so that no accidents may happen. Here, too, the first condition of the job is a dominant will that settles all subordinate questions, whether this will is represented by a single delegate or a committee charged with the execution of the resolutions of the majority of persona interested. In either case there is a very pronounced authority. Moreover, what would happen to the first train dispatched if the authority of the railway employees over the Hon. passengers were abolished?
But the necessity of authority, and of imperious authority at that, will nowhere be found more evident than on board a ship on the high seas. There, in time of danger, the lives of all depend on the instantaneous and absolute obedience of all to the will of one.
When I submitted arguments like these to the most rabid anti-authoritarians, the only answer they were able to give me was the following: Yes, that’s true, but there it is not the case of authority which we confer on our delegates, but of a commission entrusted! These gentlemen think that when they have changed the names of things they have changed the things themselves. This is how these profound thinkers mock at the whole world.
We have thus seen that, on the one hand, a certain authority, no matter how delegated, and, on the other hand, a certain subordination, are things which, independently of all social organisation, are imposed upon us together with the material conditions under which we produce and make products circulate.
We have seen, besides, that the material conditions of production and circulation inevitably develop with large-scale industry and large-scale agriculture, and increasingly tend to enlarge the scope of this authority. Hence it is absurd to speak of the principle of authority as being absolutely evil, and of the principle of autonomy as being absolutely good. Authority and autonomy are relative things whose spheres vary with the various phases of the development of society. If the autonomists confined themselves to saying that the social organisation of the future would restrict authority solely to the limits within which the conditions of production render it inevitable, we could understand each other; but they are blind to all facts that make the thing necessary and they passionately fight against the word.
Why do the anti-authoritarians not confine themselves to crying out against political authority, the state? All Socialists are agreed that the political state, and with it political authority, will disappear as a result of the coming social revolution, that is, that public functions will lose their political character and will be transformed into the simple administrative functions of watching over the true interests of society. But the anti-authoritarians demand that the political state be abolished at one stroke, even before the social conditions that gave birth to it have been destroyed. They demand that the first act of the social revolution shall be the abolition of authority. Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannon — authoritarian means, if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if it had not made use of this authority of the armed people against the bourgeois? Should we not, on the contrary, reproach it for not having used it freely enough?
Therefore, either one of two things: either the anti-authoritarians don’t know what they’re talking about, in which case they are creating nothing but confusion; or they do know, and in that case they are betraying the movement of the proletariat. In either case they serve the reaction.
FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Absolutely correct. Authoritarianism is a propaganda word. “Anti-authoritarians” never consider the context of who holds authority, and whether the authority is used to benefit regular people or just the ruling class. They also easily gulled into thinking that the forms of freedom (e. g. democracy as outlined in the US constitution) equate to actual freedom, instead of analyzing the material reality (that the US is entirely ruled by the wealthy, and that the working class holds essentially no political power).
When you look at these forms and realities, it is obvious that the United States is more authoritarian than China, for example.
melfie@lemmy.zip 2 months ago
Not necessarily the best example in this post, but in general, I find I get downvoted a lot when I make a good faith comment in .ml posts where I think I’m agreeing and am trying to understand the topic further. Getting 20 downvotes kind of kills my motivation to engage any further, though, so I usually just delete my comment , shrug, and move on. I’ve gotten to the point where I try to avoid wasting my time and energy commenting on .ml posts in the first place.
Maybe it’s just a different perspective on what a downvote means? To me, I’m generous with upvotes and withholding an upvote means I don’t find it interesting or disagree. I use downvotes sparingly for spam, trolling, comments made in bad faith, etc.
Bluescluestoothpaste@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
if a group gangs up and tells everyone with a slightly different worldview to fuck off, then they eventually will and said group will be all by themselves in their own echo chamber. If that’s the goal, then fair enough
Yes, that’s the goal. It’s a bunch of crazy people who want to be mean to anyone who disagrees with them. I don’t like it so i blocked it so I can’t see it. Maybe i have to ban mildlyinfuriating because people share these grad posts i dont like to see.
TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 2 months ago
good faith isn’t allowed on .ml
chortle_tortle@mander.xyz 2 months ago
I think a big part of it comes from having such radical opinions, and having that amplified as a condition of the instance. Because of that you get people coming in all the time saying the same things, repeating what are (to those in the instance) the same old arguments heard a million times, the welcome can be easily over stayed. With that I think people that grew up in ‘The West’ tend to have a lot of assumptions they can’t really justify or place about communist countries, and when those show through in an instance full of history pervs that strongly disagree, their response is maybe not a full “fuck off”, but enough of one to downvote.
SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Reddit is terrible for downvoting questions and people who simply don’t know much about a subject. I hope the downvoters are never parents or teachers.
TronBronson@lemmy.world 2 months ago
idk bro im in america and i gotta say id take a tankie authoritarian just to have a little revenge on the right wing authoritarians, then hopefully society will have had enough strongmen for the rest of my life.
Zamboni_Driver@lemmy.ca 2 months ago
Well yea, of course you would. That’s the typical american thought process that lead to trump.
“I would vote for someone who would hurt everyone because I think they they would hurt the people that I don’t like more”
TronBronson@lemmy.world 1 month ago
Btw I voted for Kamala so like didn’t really set out on a vengeance quest, but I was a drug dealer for 20+ years and don’t take kindly to be robbed. Also very familiar with how violent my government is. Love to see it turned out on the people who made it that way.
TronBronson@lemmy.world 1 month ago
That’s just kinda how the pendulum swings my guy. I didn’t set the damn thing in motion lmao.
TronBronson@lemmy.world 1 month ago
No I’m just a justice enjoyer. In fact I would do anything. It takes to enjoy some justice in this world right now.
Aitolda@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Me: googles tankie
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
It’s a pejorative for those who support existing socialist states.
CompassRed@discuss.tchncs.de 2 months ago
A tankie is anyone who supports violent left wing regimes. It requires support of violence and doesn’t require that the regime still exists.
W3dd1e@lemmy.zip 2 months ago
I didn’t know what it was until recently either. I learned when they started telling me about how Uhygur human rights violations were a hoax.
You’ll run into them on Lemmy eventually.
Arcanepotato@crazypeople.online 2 months ago
Your comment sounds like you are not replying to the meme, but are calling someone (idk who, the meme isn’t about an individual?) a tankie. My instance doesn’t have down votes but this is what I understand then to be for: identifying posts and replies that are off topic or do not contribute to the discussion.
ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 2 months ago
😐 Banning harmless things because a dictator doesn’t like them
😃️ Banning harmless things because a dictator doesn’t like them, People’s Republic of China/Union of Soviet Socialist Republics/any other “leftist” dictatorship
UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Banning harmless things because a dictator doesn’t like them
What if they’re banning harmful things?
Tolc@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Hilarious you called those states dictatorship, they are/were infact more democratic than liberal democracies
Hadriscus@jlai.lu 2 months ago
The lack of context… also were you talking about China by any chance ?
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
K1nsey6@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Because your ignorance doesn’t understand a dictatorship of the proletariat under communism isn’t the same as a dictatorship under fascism
stickly@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Of course it’s not the same:
-
One has staged elections for jackboots controlled by a party with a funky cross on their flag. Any political dissent gets you sent to a work camp.
-
The other has staged elections for apparatchiks controlled by a party with work tools on their flag. Any political dissent gets you sent to a re-education farm.
Couldn’t be more different.
ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
For some people, Mr. Goebbels and Ms. Luxemburg really are indistinguishable.
Tolc@lemmy.world 2 months ago
liberal elections suck, should boycott them.
-
Zomg@piefed.world 2 months ago
ProdigalFrog@slrpnk.net 2 months ago
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
Zomg@piefed.world 2 months ago
Meh, it’s horseshoe-esque ¯\(ツ)/¯
merdaverse@lemmy.zip 2 months ago
You have to have the political education of a 5 year old to claim that the far right and the far left are similar. Even centrists think the theory is horseshit:
Given the basic implausibility of the horseshoe theory, why do so many centrist commentators insist on perpetuating it? The likely answer is that it allows those in the centre to discredit the left while disavowing their own complicity with the far right. Historically, it has been “centrist” liberals – in Spain, Chile, Brazil, and in many other countries – who have helped the far right to power, usually because they would rather have had a fascist in power than a socialist.
K1nsey6@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Centrists are the only ones that subscribe to horseshoe theory
Zomg@piefed.world 2 months ago
It’s if reference to one liking fascism, and the other idolizing fascist leaders, surely you have to have the education of a 5 year old to know that.
Beyond that, yeah, similarities end. This is in direct context to what OP posted, which is discussing dictators in particular.
fizzle@quokk.au 2 months ago
Its funny i was thinking about this when I saw the post.
I can imagine if you posted that on truth social you might also get some downvotes, but perhaps not to that extent.
Any comment with the word tankie is going to get downvoted on .ml
HexesofVexes@lemmy.world 2 months ago
So, I’ve been exploring these comments for the past 30 mins. They honestly make me wonder; are we seeing an echo chamber effect by instance?
Does Lemmy have any tools to count upvote/downvote by user instances, especially by comment layer. I think I want to dive into this rabbit hole.
Sabrinamycarpet@sh.itjust.works 2 months ago
What you are seeing is lemmygrad.ml. plus hexbear and dbzer0 are silly places and you just shouldn’t go there.
W3dd1e@lemmy.zip 2 months ago
There’s a lot of Lemmy.ml too. I got banned from a community for calling them out after they said no one died in the Tienanmen Square Massacre and that Uhygur human rights violations were a hoax.
You’ll run into can escape it as long as were federated with these.
boogiebored@lemmy.world 2 months ago
yes, and a bubble
i have no idea what reputation .ml has and i have no clue what this post or most of these comments even mean
Cowbee@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
Lemmy.ml has a lot of communists, OP was down voted for implying that all socialist states are ruled by dictators.
TubularTittyFrog@lemmy.world 2 months ago
yes. that’s precisely what it is.
TronBronson@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I use .world and its been nothing but normal for the most part.
themaninblack@lemmy.world 2 months ago
A lot of nonsense apologia in these comments. Motivated reasoning and carefully cherry-picked sources. A fixation on the long history of western imperialist propaganda. Edgy contrarianism, ultimately.
What you won’t see much of:
Direct and lengthy criticism of China (the kind that isn’t just damage control)
Citations from respectable research journals
Teens and Chinese agents, it is late, go to bed, you’ve got TikTok tomorrow.
Alcoholicorn@mander.xyz 2 months ago
Direct and lengthy criticism of China
Lol you’ll find much more meaningful criticism that isn’t just jerking off over an imaginary cartoonishly-evil-for-the-sake-of-being-evil version of China that exists in lib spaces.
go_go_gadget@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Liberals are too embarrassed to admit a dictatorship has done a better job serving it’s people than a corporate owned “democracy”.
Grimy@lemmy.world 2 months ago
No context and the thread itself seems deleted? Or this is from weeks ago? Weird sub for this as well. This feels sus.
InvalidName2@lemmy.zip 2 months ago
Definitely not the only place, but certainly one of the more predictable.
RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 2 months ago
.ml deleted yet another comment I made on a normal news article pretty much saying something similar about authoritarians. And the mod had the balls to chastise me after deleting my comment and butwhatabout-ing “American imperialism” or some BS.
I would have never even commented had I realized it was .ml. What a bullshit place that is, their private little Pravda and Memory Hole.
texture@lemmy.world 2 months ago
this post is mildly infuriating.
theres no dictators on the left. this is bullshit.
GreenKnight23@lemmy.world 2 months ago
any ml instance is a blight.
go_go_gadget@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Congrats, you get fascist rigtoids then 🤷♂️
Amnesigenic@lemmy.ml 2 months ago
Lol no you’re just living in a bubble
Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Getting banned from a .ml instance is a fediverse right of passage
Mulligrubs@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I think you have to look at this the right way.
Downvotes can be a good thing. You know what they upvote, yeah?
If I’m on an index that hates dogs, and I post something complimentary to dogs, I know I’ll get a lot of downvotes. GOOD. I don’t want cat upvotes, cats are mean.
iuseasahibtw@ani.social 2 months ago
Serves you right for having a reasonable opinion.
Avicenna@programming.dev 2 months ago
they have very predictable trigger points
JackbyDev@programming.dev 2 months ago
What was the context?
stoly@lemmy.world 2 months ago
I got banned in a hard way from a lot of those sub and not on purpose. A simple comment here or there would set off an attack storm from people who sort all comments by new and look for it.
These people are no different than the militant PETA types.
favoredponcho@lemmy.zip 2 months ago
And then they ask for donations
kSPvhmTOlwvMd7Y7E@lemmy.world 2 months ago
Comments are wild here