Are you lost? This is an anti-tankie comm, not an anti-communism comm.
I understand that anti tankie is anti authoritarian. Most of the time people hijack the term tankie to be the same as pro china or pro soviet union.
Tankies in my opinion are the same as boot lickers, fascist pro authoritarian, pro war nationalist etc…
I just wanted to poke fun at the term. Sorry if it derailed the comm
No worries, mostly I was just confused.
Communism is great, on paper. Same with Capitalism.
In reality people with Type B personality disorders will corrupt any system we come up with.
IMO it’s a false dichotomy. We’ve literally seen it play out how neither system works without leveraging the other.
China has special (capitalist) economic zones. Meanwhile the Robber Barons of 19th & 21st century America show that pure capitalism is unsustainable.
If you’ve built Communism, it’s resistant to corruption and doesn’t need anything else to prop it up and feed it resources. If what you’ve built doesn’t manage this, it’s not Communism yet. Communist countries claim to be trying to build Communism, but none of them have claimed to have succeeded. This gives a great cop-out if anyone tries criticising anything that exists or existed, as if there are any problems to criticise, it can’t be Communism by definition. Really, it’s just the debate being confused by people using their own definition of terms. Obviously, it’s nonsense to say a perfect society would be bad because a past society would be bad, but usually people mean this is a bad way to try and build a perfect society because everyone that’s tried it has made a bad society and got stuck in an inescapable rut.
If you take the CCP’s word at face value, then the reason China’s doing state capitalism is because, for all its faults, Capitalism is the most reliable tool anyone’s found to raise people out of poverty and generate wealth, and once there’s low enough poverty and high enough wealth, it’ll be easier to migrate to Socialism and then to Communism. Obviously, there’s a perverse incentive that could corrupt this, as lots of people become rich and powerful in the state capitalism phase, and they’d have to give that up, but some people think this is the most viable approach.
Anarchists have another idea - if you build a society based on mutual aid without any hierarchies, then no one has power over anyone else, so there’s no opportunity to corrupt anything, and everyone’s invested in ensuring their community is robust and likes them so they’ve got a safety net to lean on and their community has an abundance of nice things that they can use. If that’s scaled up, it’s a lot closer to how Communism is supposed to work, and if it turns out that it doesn’t scale up, it’s not a bad society to live in, so it’s not a big deal if you stop scaling before there’s one society covering the whole world.
I agree that communism has never actually been accomplished at a national state level (afaik).
Way I see it, once you fill the cracks that would appear in a truly communist society, you’d just end up back at socialism. As you said, you can also approach socialism from the capitalist direction.
Where anarchism loses me is it’s apparent misunderstanding of what power fundamentally is. There are 3 kinds of power: Influence, Resources, and Prowess. Hierarchies are an inevitably due to power being relative, not existing in a void, and never remaining static.
…
IMO the real solution is to eliminate this artificial scarcity. Doesn’t matter if it’s capitalism or communism, they both use scarcity to control people. (Even though IRL it’s resoundingly late-stage-capitalism that is perpetuating the issue)
Adam Smith did say that both systems end up trending towards socialism.
Capitalism isn’t great on paper either
As with everything the major problem is humans.
Nothing will ever work the way it does on paper because we’re all terrible.
You were told democracy is bad by the people who said communism is good.
See, it’s easy!
Not for nothing buddy but democracy and communism are not opposites.
They are not opposites nor are they compatible. Maybe you think social democracy as a kind of communism?
No it’s just that communism as defined is about democracy. Maybe you’re confusing communism with tankies?
Communism is autocratic, it’s the dictatorship of the workers. Democracy is the dictatorship of the majority.
Saying communism and democracy are the same is just not correct and I suggest you are just trolling. Apples and oranges are not the same either.
Marx’s idea of the dictatorship of the proletariat is not a literal dictatorship, despite what tankies attempt to peddle. Marx posits that a worker’s democracy is a dictatorship of the proletariat in the same way that he regarded the democracies of his period - which largely lacked even such basic democratic ideas as universal suffrage - as dictatorships of the bourgeoisie.
Well of course it isn’t (a real dictatorship). I just tried to get a point through to someone thinking democracy and communism is somewhat the same thing. I just hate those people trying to conflate a good thing with their favourite thing. I didn’t even judge them.
🤷🏼♀️
Communism (here meaning both the end-stage of communism and the intermediate stages of socialism), as envisioned by Marx and most non-authoritarian leftist writers, is, inherently, meant as a democratic society. All communist societies (according to an ideal form, if not necessarily practice) are democratic, but not all democratic societies are communist. Does that make sense?
deleted by creator
The workers are the majority.
But not elected.
… who exactly are you supposing should elect the majority? The minority? The wealthy elite?
You were told communism was bad by people who told you segregation was good.
Are people having issues reading here? Isn’t this saying the people saying communism was bad are bad people? Even Pug seems to have had a stroke reading this, it’s clearly saying segregation lovers are bad people, therefore their opinion on communism is null right? Am I missing something here???
E: nobody said its wrong, I dum. Just not what this community is for.
My point isn’t that the meme is ‘wrong’, it’s not. My point is that it’s not really anti-tankie, which is what the comm is for. It seems more like something that would be posted in a comm that was anti-leftist to mock them, but this isn’t an anti-leftist comm.
Hmm… i see your point, though most tankies seem to push authoritarian agenda, which this might just barely slide with with the segregation part. Though I suppose thats your judgement, not some rando like me.
therefore their opinion on communism is null right?
Maybe more people should use null in addition to true and false. An idiot espouses on something and that’s null. Can’t assume it’s true because he’s an idiot, but can’t assume it’s false solely on that. No value.
Glad I inspired something worthwhile lol, I just thought it felt like the right wording.
The worst part is I don’t know if this is supposed to represent me, the comments, or you lol.
I’ve been told neither.
Hmmm, someone noticed the Sailor Moon character? Curious why would they pick this character? I remember so little about the anime, I do remember she was quite reflective? Was she a communist?
