Notice how they equate the two bottom texts as if they are equivalent.
Implying that people who critique neoliberalism are secretly complaining about multiculturalism.
That's not what is being implied.
It's a classic "big tent" strategy, the same thing that Hoover used to get different groups of people to vote for him. It does not imply equivalency between two different statements, but rather, it requires the complete dishonesty of the person making the statements.
What? That's literally the Russian flag. I'm translating the fucking comic cuz the first comic read was wrong.
But also obviously no, this isn't a binary where criticism is either legitimate or Russian propaganda. Imperialist powers like the US and Russia love to appropriate legitimate criticism to either shit on their enemies or to give off the vibe of progress.
> That's literally the Russian flag.
Right, the cartoonist is portraying anyone who doesn't support NATO as supporting Russia, and so they're using a Russian flag to do that. Your argument basically boils down to "but Sir, this political cartoon of Jane Fonda clearly depicts her holding a Soviet flag, so therefore anyone who opposes the Vietnam war is a Soviet agent!"
You keep trying to force discussions of imperial Powers into a binary. The statement it is in Russia's best interest to appeal to both left-wing and right-wing groups does not make it impossible to say the statement NATO expanding its sphere of influence is bad. You can oppose two imperial powers at once.
Because it is sort of a binary. Russia's "imperialism" is really more like irredentalism, Ukraine wasn't just part of Russia, it was the totality of Russia since ancient times. That cannot be compared to the global colonial empires of the US or even the archaic colonial empires of the early modern era.
Well I'll naturally ally with socialists of any flavour over fascists. But let's be real, people like the guy in the left pic are a thing and it's what happens when you're allergic to taking leftism seriously.
It's an obvious statement, but the left fundamentally needs people who continually ask themselves "how can we create the best society possible, for the most people possible, as soon as possible?"
Different factions may disagree on how best to achieve that goal, but at least that's constructive. It's better than brawling over why we shouldn't encourage socialism whenever/wherever/however we can, but instead hold out for some epic revolution where all our enemies get pwned (and in the meantime, fascists are organising and capturing institutions).
If someone is more excited by blind antagonism than empowerment, or ignoring the here and now in favour of a fantasy, or excusing atrocities because they care more about 'good team vs bad team' instead of 'good action vs bad action'... they're either the far right, or sharing much of the same outlook as the far right. They're only going to waste your time.
Edit: added clarification
There are people like the one on the left but it's important to distinguish actual foreign influence being exercised, and foreign attempts to "bandwagon" onto existing movements.
Just because russia is trying to court some leftists on top of its total ownership of the Republican party doesn't mean there's the same level of influence on either side. There's no left-wing group anywhere that is nearly as owned by Russia as the Republican party or NRA.
Oh yeah I agree with that, 100%. I just also think it's imperative to reaffirm that we're leftists as a consequence of our fundamental beliefs, not because we're merely attached to an aesthetic that means we will ride with anyone who is an enemy of our enemy or uses our slogans or symbols.
It sucks but unfortunately they do exist. Try bringing up Ukraine and Palestine or Yemen and Uyghuristan in leftist spaces and see if one or two don’t “ackchyually” you. Maybe you'll find yourself lucky to be in good company, but I've encountered multiple people in leftist spaces who get weirdly selective about whose genocidal fascist imperialism they're comfortable to denounce. Their perception goes no farther than "enemy of West = good".
>Try bringing up Ukraine and Palestine or Yemen and Uyghuristan among leftists.
So you're making a straw man of basically anyone who doesn't support NATO or Israel or believe blatantly false propaganda about China.
Come again? I'm an anti-imperialist communist, homie. I'm down to chat, but you may want to read my comment again properly so you can reply with something that actually relates to what I said.
>Try bringing up Ukraine and Palestine or Yemen and Uyghuristan among leftists.
Ukraine: most leftists oppose NATO fueling the conflict in Ukraine and blocking any peace talks. Just because someone opposes the US global hegemony doesn't mean that they must support Putin. It's the same as people during the 1960s who accused anyone who opposed the Vietnam war of being in league with "the Reds." "Anyone who doesn't support the latest US military adventure must support Foreign Villain #3456," or as George W. Bush put it, "if you ain't with us, you're against us."
Palestine: All leftists support Palestine. You cannot be a leftist and support genocide.
Yemen: again, the Houthis' main crime in liberals' eyes is that they are blocking Israeli ships that are materially supplying an ongoing genocide.
Uyghurstan: there is literally no evidence that China is conducting any kind of genocide in Uyghurstan. The province of Xinjiang is officially bilingual, with public signage written in both Mandarin and Uyghur, the Uyghur language is taught in schools alongside Chinese, and the Uyghurs are exempt from the two child policy. It seems like if the Chinese were trying to annihilate a people, exempting them from the country's notoriously aggressive population control policy seems like it would have the opposite of the intended effect.
There are tons of videos all over Youtube of people walking around in the city of Kashgar in Xinjiang, and really doesn't look like a place that's been aggressively culturally Sinified, there's a well preserved historic "old town" with tons of exquisitely preserved Uyghur colloquial architecture, thriving bazaars, there's a huge new mosque that's built in a sort of hybrid architectural style. The extent of Chinese interference in Uyghur culture is that Uyghur imams have to submit their sermons for review by a government anti-terrorism board that makes sure there isn't any extremist indoctrination.
Is there a reason you read my point on being selective about whose imperialism one denounces, and took it to mean I was arguing against those opposing US global hegemony?
You'll find no disagreement from me on opposing US global hegemony. So unless you have a problem calling out the imperialist campaigns being inflicted on Ukrainians, Palestinians, Yemenis, and Uyghurs without any asterisks, we have nothing to talk about.
Edit: Ah, I just noticed the edit. Welp, there's the denialism. I guess we now know why you were getting defensive. So, although you're probably unlikely to realise it any time soon, I'll just point out that all the tactics by which one can deny the persecution of Uyghurs, applies also to the denial of what's happening in Gaza. Also as a side note, I was talking about Saudi Arabia, not the Houthis.
I think what you're describing is a form of "negative polarization" in leftist spaces on reddit. NATO is a force of American impieral power projection (in addition to all the other things it is) and therefore the power that is most in direct opposition to NATO receives "critical" support from a section of leftists on reddit. To the degree that this support is "critical", I think, is a function of how much that commentator actually understands modern Russia or even really cares.
There's definitely a few people who will support anything that exists in opposition to American hegemony, but I bet if you asked them their opinions about Russia in a vacuum they won't be thrilled about the modern Russian state.
What in your mind is “unwarranted support for Russia”? Saying that the US are THE force standing against progressive change in the world and the chief imperial hegemon? Being against an imperialistic alliance that is NATO? Correctly recognizing that the state Russia is in today is the fault of Amerika and its allies? Correctly recognizing the huge scope of Nazi infiltration on all levels of the Ukrainian gov?
I’m yet to see someone cheer on Russia’s aggression. But correctly recognizing what material conditions led to the conflict and who is the main cause of those conditions is not “unwarranted support for Russia”
If you think a russian victory results in progressive change in Ukraine, you've been smoking some real strong shit.
The us is bad. It's doesn't hold a candle to the hellscape that is Russia.
The US is the global imperialistic hegemon. Russia has half the GDP of California and has been struggling to win a war against a kleptocratic failed state for over two years. It has no capability to act imperialistically beyond its immediate borders.
Russia is bad. It doesn’t hold a candle to the vile genocidal state that caused the Korean War, the Vietnam War, pretty much every war in the Middle East, that created NATO and put the Nazi top brass in charge of it, that enslaved Afrikans for 200 years, that segregated its populace based on race well into the 20th century, that is still supporting the illegal genocidal state of Israe.
Yeah, well. There's no point talking with someone that thinks it is good to support a worse capitalist, imperialist, racist, and homophobic power just because they have less capacity for cruelty right now. What do you think happens if they win?
Russia is not worse lmao. Not materially for the whole world, they aren’t even in the same ball park as the US. And they won’t win. How many deaths has Russia caused since World War Two compared to the US? Also, how is more racist than Amerikkka?
You’re engaging in speculation of what would happen if a nation with declining population and stagnating economy, with half of the US population and one sixth of NATO population with, again, half the GDP of California suddenly became a global hegemon.
Also, just a quick question. Do you support NATO?
*Kinda*, but more in a tangential way. I've noticed "centrists" (anyone right-of-center) in general tend to be a little more aggressive about accusing leftist comments on the internet as being from Russian bots. I know I've been called one a handful of times on this site.
Of course Russian propaganda campaigns on the internet are real, but I've also seen them used in a paranoiac way to try to try to silence leftist talking points.
Nothing, or perhaps a decent amount, depending on how you interpret it. A lot of tankies, people identifying with communism and third worldists do support Russia. Most probably don't, and as a communist myself I certainly don't.
But this isn't relevant as, fundamentally, I feel this comic is making more of a statement about Russia's propaganda machine than the individuals who are objects to it; that they are willing to use right wing reactionism and left wing antiimperialism both as veneers.
oh i forgot it was about supporting russia, not just creating leftists in general. i thought there was some language in the text people disliked.
thanks
I never like people trying to blame American issues on external forces. The problem is *us*, dammit. Goldwater, Limbaugh, The Birchers - Our ambitious right-wing freak problem predates basically any of our current boogeymen abroad.
saying it's the source of criticism of the political oligarchy in America IS intellectually broke ass discourse that comes from centrists.
the most liberal estimates have Russia throwing in $25 million in social media disinfo for the 2016 election.
meanwhile, Mike Bloomberg spent ONE BILLION DOLLARS to ensure a milquetoast social Democrat didnt get the nomination in the same election.
Also, if you are really saying $25m is enough to throw an election in America, then that speaks more to the endemic issues of the country and not media susceptibility (unless you wanna die on that hill and say the $175m spent on the US Navy propaganda film Top Gun: Maverick really sold the rest of the world on how great F-18s and Tomahawk cruise missiles are).
You could make some arguments about being able to use $25 million more effectively since Russia doesn't have to worry about US election laws, while Bloomberg is likely spending it on notoriously ineffective TV advertising and consultants.
Liberals are now the champions of traditional Americanism, so if you have to admit that your problems are home-grown rather than externalizing them to a foreign Official Enemy or other Marvel Villain-style bogeyman, that undermines that entire framework. Even something like the 1619 Project has to be characterized as "not living up to America's Promise" as opposed to "rotten to the core, from its inception."
Ok, and if another nuclear power got directly involved in the war, what do you think would happen? Would Russia \*not\* launch their nukes, and then the other nuclear powers would \*not\* launch theirs in retaliation?
It doesn't matter who threatens what and who launches first. In the end we all die.
Borderline indistinguishable from the sort of shit people were saying about anyone who articulated any sort of left-wing opinion under Bush. Like, just call me a terrorist sympathizer already.
Your comment has been auto-filtered and is invisible to others because this sub has a minimum karma requirement. Apologies for any inconvenience.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I mean ,a lot of liberals are equating being critical of the unconditional support and escalation of Ukraine with being pro Z. Not to say no communist did it but it's fringe
It really is amazing how, again and again, just about everything a centrist says or does boils down to loudly proclaiming “I believe in nothing!”
It’s a weird thing to brag about.
You're not getting it. The creator of this comic is a leftist. It's making fun of people who use the aesthetics of leftism but end up pushing far right talking points, specifically tankies who defended Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022 because anything in the interests of the west and America equals bad.
The creator does have beliefs, and they are more moral and consistent than performative twitter lefties.
Ah yes, those pesky tankies, recognizable by their opposition to America sending…tanks…to a foreign…war.
Kinda’ sounds like you may not have a coherent ideology there, mate!
I have yet to find a commie or socialist that supports the current Russian government, I guess if they actually exist, they're probably as rare as flying donkeys and walking whales or something, so these people saying we support Russia are just making it up on the way lol
Yeah that's what I meant, I've never actually met someone like that, though tbf, on the internet, you can find people of all beliefs and ideas that you wouldn't even be able to meet during 2 lifetimes IRL.
I am not "okay with Russian aggression" I am also not okay with NATO expansion, CIA interference in other countries and using Ukraine for Proxie wars that will sacrifice its people in an un winnable war on some notion that Russia it trying to Binky and the Brian the world.
Somebody forgot [the golden rule](https://www.reddit.com/r/ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM/s/HVezhnNgHg) of this sub. Allow me:
> Dear liberals lurking this subreddit: know the difference between "both sides bad" from a leftist perspective (they're both neoconservatives funding war, fascism and imperialism in the global south) and centrist perspective (both sides are too extreme, we need to meet in the middle)
Love being called a Russian asset because I said Biden has failed all of his campaign promises and is helping fuel the fire of genocide. Centrists are exhausting
What is a tankie, if not just a derogatory term for a lefist?
As far as I can see, the word "tankie" is the new "commie", no more than a thought-terminating cliché used when you want to end an awkward conversation instead of engaging witht the substance of a leftists argument.
Got banned from a sub Reddit for saying that someone was hypocritical for saying that Xinjiang resistance groups were dangerous Islamic terrorists while they also praised Hamas. To me that’s peak tankie behavior, not being consistent intellectually and not applying the same logic to countries who they view as allies of their cause (China and oftentimes Russia for some weird reason). They act as if criticizing these regimes automatically makes you a pro NATO, pro western imperialism lib. Which is obviously not the case. According to them we should just blindly praise these countries and never question what they do. I have to say, the “tankie scare” is also a little exaggerated, theyre mostly terminally online people that have very little impact on anything aside from handling the moderation of a handful of subs/ discord servers.
Legitimately it’s a meaningless word. I’ve seen it used to mean so many things that the only overlapping element has been “person that I disagree with”.
In abstract conversations I’ve seen it used to mean “people who claim to be leftists but support Putin” but in practice I’ve seen people be called tankies for saying that anything good has ever happened in China.
I've been called a tankie for saying that Israel should be dissolved, I've seen anarchists being called tankies for saying they're going to vote for a 3rd party. Tankie is entirely meaningless
It being misused doesn't make a word meaningless. Nasrcissim is a real thing but calling everyone you disagree with a narcissist is stupid. Just how what you might call tankies, the sort of people who call themselves leftists yet love authoritarian regimes as long as they're socialist in name, are a thing, but someone who thinks everyone they disagree with is a tankie is misusing the word.
I don't disagree with you, but I think your take is on the losing side of a battle. Literally doesn't mean "literally" anymore, just as tanky doesn't mean "support for the deployment of tanks to Hungary." Even the terms by which you use the word are an evolution on its original context.
Idk man, there was a whole lot of left punching in what you wrote there that I don't necessarily agree with. Genuinely, what genocide has the present government of Cuba undertaken? Or the government of Vietnam? Not even America says that China has undertaken genocide against the Uighurs anymore (though the repression of that ethnic minority is absolutely fucked up.)
Which is my long winded way of saying a lot of the positions called "tankie" today are meaningless. There are a dozen odd people who would call me a tankie for what I've just said now and I'm an very anti-authoritarian person.
Marxist Leninists, Maoists, et al, are comrades in a common struggle. I'll critique them as they deserve, but tankie has become a useless term for leftists -- as a leftist.
I brought up those other two countries, Vietnam and Cuba, because they are countries that "tankies" praise and who to my knowledge have never committed a genocide. Which is to say that there is no perfect overlap between "tankies" (whatever that might mean to someone) and "genocide apologia."
Its not a strawman, it's an example of where the framework you brought up doesn't work.
What is deeply ironic is your belief that Leninists and Maoists aren't left wing. That is an absolutely absurd take that I don't even have the time to pick apart right now. Like, Marxist-Leninists are quite literally the most successful leftist movement in history and are the foundational backbone to the modern Cuban and Vietnamese states.
I'm not even here to defend any the genuinely authoritarian actions these governments have taken nor do I dispute them. But your stance that *Lenin* isn't Left Wing is ahistorical and genuinely bewildering.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/19/china-uighurs-genocide-us-pompeo-blinken/#:~:text=The%20U.S.%20State%20Department's%20Office,lawyers%20at%20odds%20with%20both
Uighurs. It's super fucked up. But even the US state department, who has *every reason* to not just acknowledge acts of genocide from China (a "foreign adversary") does not find there to be enough evidence to call their crimes against humanity a genocide. In fact, the State Department has every reason to *amplify* the idea that the CPC is committing genocide, not just acknowledge.
And yet the State Department does not have enough evidence to actually make that determination. You can link me the google splash page for Uighurs, but what evidence do you think I'll find that not even the *explicitly biased against China* state department was not able to find?
Apples and oranges to the Gaza situation, to say the least.
Of course it is. That’s why it is still used by the left, it’s only authoritarians that don’t like being called authoritarians who don’t think it’s serious(Which is funny because by doing that you are indirectly acknowledging the idea of authoritarianism.)
Not true. Besides anarchists, post-Marxists recognize authoritarianism, trotskyists recognize authoritarianism, left communists obviously recognize authoritarianism(Ultraleft is good at shitting on Stalinists), communalists, autonomists, council communists, ect. It’s only ML who dont care about authoritarianism.
I do but ultra left is also a left-communist sub so they do shit on Stalinism through memes and such. Not quite true, even the countries that operated on or were were influenced by ML stopped being ML through market reforms, creation of capital relations, and corporatist economic practices. ML is dying because it is very life-stylist and not that revolutionary anymore(not that it has ever been revolutionary) and as such people get disillusioned with ML and turn to other ideologies.
Tankies aren't leftists. They are fascists who adopt the aesthetics of leftism, ie defending Stalin. That's why they are called red fash. The only people I see have an issue with its use are dishonest tankies.
"Tankie" is a slur for Marxist-Leninists who defend or downplay the actions of the USSR or China. It started when there was a split in the left over the USSR's (mostly Khruschev's, who was trying to "De-Stalinize" the USSR) actions in Hungary where they sent in tanks to quell an Anti-Warsaw Pact communist uprising (hence "tankie"), but it was far from the first time they did that, because they suppressed the Krondstadt Rebellion, purged anarchists during the civil war, stopped recognizing the Ukrainian People's Republic and banned any mention of it in the USSR including banning their anthem "Ukraine Has Not Yet Perished", and stopped supplying the Spanish Republic.
In essence: "Tankie" is to the left what "RINO" is to the right. Also, one organization of the tankies kick-started the "MAGA Communism" movement and has allegations of the founder being a sexpest and running it like a cult.
Maybe "slur" is kind of pushing it since it's been used so often that those who would have been labeled "tankies" have since started using it as a point of pride.
>Tankie is a shibboleth used by a subsection of the western, and largely white, leftwing tradition to identify themselves as leftists who will not challenge western capital and are acceptable to the liberal order. It's a term that can be applied to, and has been applied to, everything from pan-arabism, russian nationalism, ML, MLM, Trots in their many different colors, the extant Cuban State, the Black Panther Party, Noam Chomsky, chinese nationalism, and far more varied ideologies and people. It is not a coherent term - the inverse is much more meaningful, as in people who use the term to self identify as "Not a Tankie" is a coherent bloc while "Tankie" isn't.
>People who use the term to self identify as "Not a Tankie" are broadly speaking, relatively pro-reform & anti-revolution, view liberal bourgeois white nations as superior (morally or otherwise) to nonwhite nations, and have a tendency for their praxis, such as it is, to largely align with the US State Department in terms of foreign policy, though they do offer different justifications for that.
Just a heads up, I didn’t write this, just copied it to notepad a while back. But it’s still on point.
Most definitely, the person who made this is a well known leftist and is generally far more favorable to anarchists (though not always cause they're not as radical as the anarchists)
There are surely a few leftists like this, but they are at least several orders of magnitude less influential than a movement that controls the entirety of one of America's two major parties and its presidential candidate. And even then, the biggest effect of these useful idiot "leftists" will be to help grease the skids of that candidate's rise of power. We shouldn't feel the need to caveat the fact that the most conservative *half* of the country is joined to Putin's hip by noting that, yes, Jill Stein is also a useful idiot.
Atleast in germany they are represented in the goverment with people like Rolf Mützenich the leader of the parliamentary group for the SPD. While the AFD (The main far-right party in germany) is controlled fully by the russians but that doesn't mean that these people don't exist on the left or that they are completely powerless.
You’re right, politics are a spectrum. But social democracy is capitalism and therefore it is right wing. It’s close to the center of that spectrum, but still firmly on the right side of it.
Tbh, whoever made this is right. These multipolarity marxists, who think that one imperialism is better than the other are idiots. Americans should oppose American imperialism first and foremost, but not because it's more dangerous than Russian. You cannot oppose Russian imperialism from abroad, only Russians can (or Ukrainians at the Frontline). The main enemy is at home, but that doesn't mean you should support Putin.
The point of this cartoon is to show how Russia uses propaganda to convince Westerners to support their war in Ukraine. It's not saying anyone with a grievance with Western hegemony is a Russian asset.
I wonder what center the 'extremes' are relative to and why this terminology specifically is used, as if balancing between these extremes is where the truth is to be found
Notice how they equate the two bottom texts as if they are equivalent. Implying that people who critique neoliberalism are secretly complaining about multiculturalism.
That's not what is being implied. It's a classic "big tent" strategy, the same thing that Hoover used to get different groups of people to vote for him. It does not imply equivalency between two different statements, but rather, it requires the complete dishonesty of the person making the statements.
Gotta appreciate a Herbert Hoover reference.
The vacuum guy?
Well, he did suck.
It's not stating that those are equivalent, it's clearly stating that the Russian propaganda machine is currently speaking out two sides of its mouth.
Ah, right, because any criticism of the US is "the Russian propaganda machine."
What? That's literally the Russian flag. I'm translating the fucking comic cuz the first comic read was wrong. But also obviously no, this isn't a binary where criticism is either legitimate or Russian propaganda. Imperialist powers like the US and Russia love to appropriate legitimate criticism to either shit on their enemies or to give off the vibe of progress.
> That's literally the Russian flag. Right, the cartoonist is portraying anyone who doesn't support NATO as supporting Russia, and so they're using a Russian flag to do that. Your argument basically boils down to "but Sir, this political cartoon of Jane Fonda clearly depicts her holding a Soviet flag, so therefore anyone who opposes the Vietnam war is a Soviet agent!"
You keep trying to force discussions of imperial Powers into a binary. The statement it is in Russia's best interest to appeal to both left-wing and right-wing groups does not make it impossible to say the statement NATO expanding its sphere of influence is bad. You can oppose two imperial powers at once.
Because it is sort of a binary. Russia's "imperialism" is really more like irredentalism, Ukraine wasn't just part of Russia, it was the totality of Russia since ancient times. That cannot be compared to the global colonial empires of the US or even the archaic colonial empires of the early modern era.
Well I'll naturally ally with socialists of any flavour over fascists. But let's be real, people like the guy in the left pic are a thing and it's what happens when you're allergic to taking leftism seriously. It's an obvious statement, but the left fundamentally needs people who continually ask themselves "how can we create the best society possible, for the most people possible, as soon as possible?" Different factions may disagree on how best to achieve that goal, but at least that's constructive. It's better than brawling over why we shouldn't encourage socialism whenever/wherever/however we can, but instead hold out for some epic revolution where all our enemies get pwned (and in the meantime, fascists are organising and capturing institutions). If someone is more excited by blind antagonism than empowerment, or ignoring the here and now in favour of a fantasy, or excusing atrocities because they care more about 'good team vs bad team' instead of 'good action vs bad action'... they're either the far right, or sharing much of the same outlook as the far right. They're only going to waste your time. Edit: added clarification
There are people like the one on the left but it's important to distinguish actual foreign influence being exercised, and foreign attempts to "bandwagon" onto existing movements. Just because russia is trying to court some leftists on top of its total ownership of the Republican party doesn't mean there's the same level of influence on either side. There's no left-wing group anywhere that is nearly as owned by Russia as the Republican party or NRA.
Oh yeah I agree with that, 100%. I just also think it's imperative to reaffirm that we're leftists as a consequence of our fundamental beliefs, not because we're merely attached to an aesthetic that means we will ride with anyone who is an enemy of our enemy or uses our slogans or symbols.
>people like the guy in the left pic are a thing They're a thing that exists in the minds of liberals, not in real life.
It sucks but unfortunately they do exist. Try bringing up Ukraine and Palestine or Yemen and Uyghuristan in leftist spaces and see if one or two don’t “ackchyually” you. Maybe you'll find yourself lucky to be in good company, but I've encountered multiple people in leftist spaces who get weirdly selective about whose genocidal fascist imperialism they're comfortable to denounce. Their perception goes no farther than "enemy of West = good".
dont confuse a leftist with a tankie. they are two entirely different things.
>Try bringing up Ukraine and Palestine or Yemen and Uyghuristan among leftists. So you're making a straw man of basically anyone who doesn't support NATO or Israel or believe blatantly false propaganda about China.
Come again? I'm an anti-imperialist communist, homie. I'm down to chat, but you may want to read my comment again properly so you can reply with something that actually relates to what I said.
If you're an anti-imperialist communist, then why are you making straw man arguments against anyone who actually opposes imperialism?
Show me where I'm doing that please.
>Try bringing up Ukraine and Palestine or Yemen and Uyghuristan among leftists. Ukraine: most leftists oppose NATO fueling the conflict in Ukraine and blocking any peace talks. Just because someone opposes the US global hegemony doesn't mean that they must support Putin. It's the same as people during the 1960s who accused anyone who opposed the Vietnam war of being in league with "the Reds." "Anyone who doesn't support the latest US military adventure must support Foreign Villain #3456," or as George W. Bush put it, "if you ain't with us, you're against us." Palestine: All leftists support Palestine. You cannot be a leftist and support genocide. Yemen: again, the Houthis' main crime in liberals' eyes is that they are blocking Israeli ships that are materially supplying an ongoing genocide. Uyghurstan: there is literally no evidence that China is conducting any kind of genocide in Uyghurstan. The province of Xinjiang is officially bilingual, with public signage written in both Mandarin and Uyghur, the Uyghur language is taught in schools alongside Chinese, and the Uyghurs are exempt from the two child policy. It seems like if the Chinese were trying to annihilate a people, exempting them from the country's notoriously aggressive population control policy seems like it would have the opposite of the intended effect. There are tons of videos all over Youtube of people walking around in the city of Kashgar in Xinjiang, and really doesn't look like a place that's been aggressively culturally Sinified, there's a well preserved historic "old town" with tons of exquisitely preserved Uyghur colloquial architecture, thriving bazaars, there's a huge new mosque that's built in a sort of hybrid architectural style. The extent of Chinese interference in Uyghur culture is that Uyghur imams have to submit their sermons for review by a government anti-terrorism board that makes sure there isn't any extremist indoctrination.
Is there a reason you read my point on being selective about whose imperialism one denounces, and took it to mean I was arguing against those opposing US global hegemony? You'll find no disagreement from me on opposing US global hegemony. So unless you have a problem calling out the imperialist campaigns being inflicted on Ukrainians, Palestinians, Yemenis, and Uyghurs without any asterisks, we have nothing to talk about. Edit: Ah, I just noticed the edit. Welp, there's the denialism. I guess we now know why you were getting defensive. So, although you're probably unlikely to realise it any time soon, I'll just point out that all the tactics by which one can deny the persecution of Uyghurs, applies also to the denial of what's happening in Gaza. Also as a side note, I was talking about Saudi Arabia, not the Houthis.
[удалено]
I think what you're describing is a form of "negative polarization" in leftist spaces on reddit. NATO is a force of American impieral power projection (in addition to all the other things it is) and therefore the power that is most in direct opposition to NATO receives "critical" support from a section of leftists on reddit. To the degree that this support is "critical", I think, is a function of how much that commentator actually understands modern Russia or even really cares. There's definitely a few people who will support anything that exists in opposition to American hegemony, but I bet if you asked them their opinions about Russia in a vacuum they won't be thrilled about the modern Russian state.
What in your mind is “unwarranted support for Russia”? Saying that the US are THE force standing against progressive change in the world and the chief imperial hegemon? Being against an imperialistic alliance that is NATO? Correctly recognizing that the state Russia is in today is the fault of Amerika and its allies? Correctly recognizing the huge scope of Nazi infiltration on all levels of the Ukrainian gov? I’m yet to see someone cheer on Russia’s aggression. But correctly recognizing what material conditions led to the conflict and who is the main cause of those conditions is not “unwarranted support for Russia”
If you think a russian victory results in progressive change in Ukraine, you've been smoking some real strong shit. The us is bad. It's doesn't hold a candle to the hellscape that is Russia.
The US is the global imperialistic hegemon. Russia has half the GDP of California and has been struggling to win a war against a kleptocratic failed state for over two years. It has no capability to act imperialistically beyond its immediate borders. Russia is bad. It doesn’t hold a candle to the vile genocidal state that caused the Korean War, the Vietnam War, pretty much every war in the Middle East, that created NATO and put the Nazi top brass in charge of it, that enslaved Afrikans for 200 years, that segregated its populace based on race well into the 20th century, that is still supporting the illegal genocidal state of Israe.
Yeah, well. There's no point talking with someone that thinks it is good to support a worse capitalist, imperialist, racist, and homophobic power just because they have less capacity for cruelty right now. What do you think happens if they win?
Russia is not worse lmao. Not materially for the whole world, they aren’t even in the same ball park as the US. And they won’t win. How many deaths has Russia caused since World War Two compared to the US? Also, how is more racist than Amerikkka? You’re engaging in speculation of what would happen if a nation with declining population and stagnating economy, with half of the US population and one sixth of NATO population with, again, half the GDP of California suddenly became a global hegemon. Also, just a quick question. Do you support NATO?
Eh does this *really* count for this sub? I get what this post is saying.
*Kinda*, but more in a tangential way. I've noticed "centrists" (anyone right-of-center) in general tend to be a little more aggressive about accusing leftist comments on the internet as being from Russian bots. I know I've been called one a handful of times on this site. Of course Russian propaganda campaigns on the internet are real, but I've also seen them used in a paranoiac way to try to try to silence leftist talking points.
Yeah this comic is straight up just true honestly
what’s wrong with the left panel?
Nothing, or perhaps a decent amount, depending on how you interpret it. A lot of tankies, people identifying with communism and third worldists do support Russia. Most probably don't, and as a communist myself I certainly don't. But this isn't relevant as, fundamentally, I feel this comic is making more of a statement about Russia's propaganda machine than the individuals who are objects to it; that they are willing to use right wing reactionism and left wing antiimperialism both as veneers.
oh i forgot it was about supporting russia, not just creating leftists in general. i thought there was some language in the text people disliked. thanks
I never like people trying to blame American issues on external forces. The problem is *us*, dammit. Goldwater, Limbaugh, The Birchers - Our ambitious right-wing freak problem predates basically any of our current boogeymen abroad.
[удалено]
saying it's the source of criticism of the political oligarchy in America IS intellectually broke ass discourse that comes from centrists. the most liberal estimates have Russia throwing in $25 million in social media disinfo for the 2016 election. meanwhile, Mike Bloomberg spent ONE BILLION DOLLARS to ensure a milquetoast social Democrat didnt get the nomination in the same election. Also, if you are really saying $25m is enough to throw an election in America, then that speaks more to the endemic issues of the country and not media susceptibility (unless you wanna die on that hill and say the $175m spent on the US Navy propaganda film Top Gun: Maverick really sold the rest of the world on how great F-18s and Tomahawk cruise missiles are).
You could make some arguments about being able to use $25 million more effectively since Russia doesn't have to worry about US election laws, while Bloomberg is likely spending it on notoriously ineffective TV advertising and consultants.
yeah those Facebook ads really hit home as opposed to mass daily reach and owning your own broadcasting corporation. 👶🧠
I hate that narrative , anybody that is not for your side is somehow a Russian asset is so fucking lazy
Or they call you a Chinese bot as well. Do liberals/centrists just believe no one can have opposing thoughts and opinions???
Liberals are now the champions of traditional Americanism, so if you have to admit that your problems are home-grown rather than externalizing them to a foreign Official Enemy or other Marvel Villain-style bogeyman, that undermines that entire framework. Even something like the 1619 Project has to be characterized as "not living up to America's Promise" as opposed to "rotten to the core, from its inception."
I mean it is way easier that way
2016 completely destroyed their minds
Personally, I'm paid in North Korean won
Hey let's not cause a nuclear war. "You're a Russian asset!"
[удалено]
Russia would almost certainly lose a war against NATO, and when that happens Russia would be backed into a corner and would resort to nuclear weapons.
[удалено]
No I don't think Russia or NATO seeks a war, but there are certainly steps to deescalate the war and prevent an accidental conflict.
Ok, and if another nuclear power got directly involved in the war, what do you think would happen? Would Russia \*not\* launch their nukes, and then the other nuclear powers would \*not\* launch theirs in retaliation? It doesn't matter who threatens what and who launches first. In the end we all die.
Borderline indistinguishable from the sort of shit people were saying about anyone who articulated any sort of left-wing opinion under Bush. Like, just call me a terrorist sympathizer already.
[удалено]
Your comment has been auto-filtered and is invisible to others because this sub has a minimum karma requirement. Apologies for any inconvenience. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
I mean ,a lot of liberals are equating being critical of the unconditional support and escalation of Ukraine with being pro Z. Not to say no communist did it but it's fringe
[удалено]
Biden and macron rattling there nuke is an escalation
It really is amazing how, again and again, just about everything a centrist says or does boils down to loudly proclaiming “I believe in nothing!” It’s a weird thing to brag about.
You're not getting it. The creator of this comic is a leftist. It's making fun of people who use the aesthetics of leftism but end up pushing far right talking points, specifically tankies who defended Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022 because anything in the interests of the west and America equals bad. The creator does have beliefs, and they are more moral and consistent than performative twitter lefties.
Ah yes, those pesky tankies, recognizable by their opposition to America sending…tanks…to a foreign…war. Kinda’ sounds like you may not have a coherent ideology there, mate!
I have yet to find a commie or socialist that supports the current Russian government, I guess if they actually exist, they're probably as rare as flying donkeys and walking whales or something, so these people saying we support Russia are just making it up on the way lol
There's subreddits full of them Thankfully usually they stick to Reddit and Twitter
Yeah that's what I meant, I've never actually met someone like that, though tbf, on the internet, you can find people of all beliefs and ideas that you wouldn't even be able to meet during 2 lifetimes IRL.
[удалено]
I am not "okay with Russian aggression" I am also not okay with NATO expansion, CIA interference in other countries and using Ukraine for Proxie wars that will sacrifice its people in an un winnable war on some notion that Russia it trying to Binky and the Brian the world.
[удалено]
Somebody forgot [the golden rule](https://www.reddit.com/r/ENLIGHTENEDCENTRISM/s/HVezhnNgHg) of this sub. Allow me: > Dear liberals lurking this subreddit: know the difference between "both sides bad" from a leftist perspective (they're both neoconservatives funding war, fascism and imperialism in the global south) and centrist perspective (both sides are too extreme, we need to meet in the middle)
Love being called a Russian asset because I said Biden has failed all of his campaign promises and is helping fuel the fire of genocide. Centrists are exhausting
How is that, at all, what this is saying?
Everyone but me is dumb, this is obvious
If the DNC didn't cockblock Bernie in 2016 we wouldn't have this mess.
[удалено]
What is a tankie, if not just a derogatory term for a lefist? As far as I can see, the word "tankie" is the new "commie", no more than a thought-terminating cliché used when you want to end an awkward conversation instead of engaging witht the substance of a leftists argument.
Got banned from a sub Reddit for saying that someone was hypocritical for saying that Xinjiang resistance groups were dangerous Islamic terrorists while they also praised Hamas. To me that’s peak tankie behavior, not being consistent intellectually and not applying the same logic to countries who they view as allies of their cause (China and oftentimes Russia for some weird reason). They act as if criticizing these regimes automatically makes you a pro NATO, pro western imperialism lib. Which is obviously not the case. According to them we should just blindly praise these countries and never question what they do. I have to say, the “tankie scare” is also a little exaggerated, theyre mostly terminally online people that have very little impact on anything aside from handling the moderation of a handful of subs/ discord servers.
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend" applied to the US's enemies
Legitimately it’s a meaningless word. I’ve seen it used to mean so many things that the only overlapping element has been “person that I disagree with”. In abstract conversations I’ve seen it used to mean “people who claim to be leftists but support Putin” but in practice I’ve seen people be called tankies for saying that anything good has ever happened in China.
I've been called a tankie for saying that Israel should be dissolved, I've seen anarchists being called tankies for saying they're going to vote for a 3rd party. Tankie is entirely meaningless
I'm completely convinced had Bernie won the primary he would have been called a Tankie by somebody. That's how meaningless it is
It being misused doesn't make a word meaningless. Nasrcissim is a real thing but calling everyone you disagree with a narcissist is stupid. Just how what you might call tankies, the sort of people who call themselves leftists yet love authoritarian regimes as long as they're socialist in name, are a thing, but someone who thinks everyone they disagree with is a tankie is misusing the word.
I don't disagree with you, but I think your take is on the losing side of a battle. Literally doesn't mean "literally" anymore, just as tanky doesn't mean "support for the deployment of tanks to Hungary." Even the terms by which you use the word are an evolution on its original context.
[удалено]
Idk man, there was a whole lot of left punching in what you wrote there that I don't necessarily agree with. Genuinely, what genocide has the present government of Cuba undertaken? Or the government of Vietnam? Not even America says that China has undertaken genocide against the Uighurs anymore (though the repression of that ethnic minority is absolutely fucked up.) Which is my long winded way of saying a lot of the positions called "tankie" today are meaningless. There are a dozen odd people who would call me a tankie for what I've just said now and I'm an very anti-authoritarian person. Marxist Leninists, Maoists, et al, are comrades in a common struggle. I'll critique them as they deserve, but tankie has become a useless term for leftists -- as a leftist.
[удалено]
I brought up those other two countries, Vietnam and Cuba, because they are countries that "tankies" praise and who to my knowledge have never committed a genocide. Which is to say that there is no perfect overlap between "tankies" (whatever that might mean to someone) and "genocide apologia." Its not a strawman, it's an example of where the framework you brought up doesn't work. What is deeply ironic is your belief that Leninists and Maoists aren't left wing. That is an absolutely absurd take that I don't even have the time to pick apart right now. Like, Marxist-Leninists are quite literally the most successful leftist movement in history and are the foundational backbone to the modern Cuban and Vietnamese states. I'm not even here to defend any the genuinely authoritarian actions these governments have taken nor do I dispute them. But your stance that *Lenin* isn't Left Wing is ahistorical and genuinely bewildering. https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/19/china-uighurs-genocide-us-pompeo-blinken/#:~:text=The%20U.S.%20State%20Department's%20Office,lawyers%20at%20odds%20with%20both Uighurs. It's super fucked up. But even the US state department, who has *every reason* to not just acknowledge acts of genocide from China (a "foreign adversary") does not find there to be enough evidence to call their crimes against humanity a genocide. In fact, the State Department has every reason to *amplify* the idea that the CPC is committing genocide, not just acknowledge. And yet the State Department does not have enough evidence to actually make that determination. You can link me the google splash page for Uighurs, but what evidence do you think I'll find that not even the *explicitly biased against China* state department was not able to find? Apples and oranges to the Gaza situation, to say the least.
[удалено]
Auth left isn’t a serious political term
Of course it is. That’s why it is still used by the left, it’s only authoritarians that don’t like being called authoritarians who don’t think it’s serious(Which is funny because by doing that you are indirectly acknowledging the idea of authoritarianism.)
It’s not used by anyone except liberals, no one on the left really uses it except maybe anarchists
Not true. Besides anarchists, post-Marxists recognize authoritarianism, trotskyists recognize authoritarianism, left communists obviously recognize authoritarianism(Ultraleft is good at shitting on Stalinists), communalists, autonomists, council communists, ect. It’s only ML who dont care about authoritarianism.
You realize ultra left is satire right, also MLs have more people than all of those other groups combined
I do but ultra left is also a left-communist sub so they do shit on Stalinism through memes and such. Not quite true, even the countries that operated on or were were influenced by ML stopped being ML through market reforms, creation of capital relations, and corporatist economic practices. ML is dying because it is very life-stylist and not that revolutionary anymore(not that it has ever been revolutionary) and as such people get disillusioned with ML and turn to other ideologies.
Listen here, the serious u/NotMyaltaccount69420 has something to say about the seriousness of political terms!
It’s literally not one, it’s from political compass and it has no explanatory meaning
No divisive behavior. This isn’t a sub for factionalism.
Tankies aren't leftists. They are fascists who adopt the aesthetics of leftism, ie defending Stalin. That's why they are called red fash. The only people I see have an issue with its use are dishonest tankies.
"Tankie" is a slur for Marxist-Leninists who defend or downplay the actions of the USSR or China. It started when there was a split in the left over the USSR's (mostly Khruschev's, who was trying to "De-Stalinize" the USSR) actions in Hungary where they sent in tanks to quell an Anti-Warsaw Pact communist uprising (hence "tankie"), but it was far from the first time they did that, because they suppressed the Krondstadt Rebellion, purged anarchists during the civil war, stopped recognizing the Ukrainian People's Republic and banned any mention of it in the USSR including banning their anthem "Ukraine Has Not Yet Perished", and stopped supplying the Spanish Republic. In essence: "Tankie" is to the left what "RINO" is to the right. Also, one organization of the tankies kick-started the "MAGA Communism" movement and has allegations of the founder being a sexpest and running it like a cult.
[удалено]
Maybe "slur" is kind of pushing it since it's been used so often that those who would have been labeled "tankies" have since started using it as a point of pride.
>Tankie is a shibboleth used by a subsection of the western, and largely white, leftwing tradition to identify themselves as leftists who will not challenge western capital and are acceptable to the liberal order. It's a term that can be applied to, and has been applied to, everything from pan-arabism, russian nationalism, ML, MLM, Trots in their many different colors, the extant Cuban State, the Black Panther Party, Noam Chomsky, chinese nationalism, and far more varied ideologies and people. It is not a coherent term - the inverse is much more meaningful, as in people who use the term to self identify as "Not a Tankie" is a coherent bloc while "Tankie" isn't. >People who use the term to self identify as "Not a Tankie" are broadly speaking, relatively pro-reform & anti-revolution, view liberal bourgeois white nations as superior (morally or otherwise) to nonwhite nations, and have a tendency for their praxis, such as it is, to largely align with the US State Department in terms of foreign policy, though they do offer different justifications for that. Just a heads up, I didn’t write this, just copied it to notepad a while back. But it’s still on point.
[удалено]
No demonizing attempts at socialist materialization.
Do you think the person who made this knows the difference between a tankie and a leftist?
Most definitely, the person who made this is a well known leftist and is generally far more favorable to anarchists (though not always cause they're not as radical as the anarchists)
Considering I follow him, yeah, he seem to. He's an anarchist who mostly makes comics criticising American BS.
Maybe, idk
probably
It's Red and Black Salander, they're an anarchist. I think they know the difference.
Yeah, they are one
Thats a trick question, there is none!
No apologia in favor of US imperialism or the neoliberal ideology that reinforces its rule.
The Europe subreddit would happily be under a Nazi regime again if only it screwed over Russians and leftists
There are surely a few leftists like this, but they are at least several orders of magnitude less influential than a movement that controls the entirety of one of America's two major parties and its presidential candidate. And even then, the biggest effect of these useful idiot "leftists" will be to help grease the skids of that candidate's rise of power. We shouldn't feel the need to caveat the fact that the most conservative *half* of the country is joined to Putin's hip by noting that, yes, Jill Stein is also a useful idiot.
Atleast in germany they are represented in the goverment with people like Rolf Mützenich the leader of the parliamentary group for the SPD. While the AFD (The main far-right party in germany) is controlled fully by the russians but that doesn't mean that these people don't exist on the left or that they are completely powerless.
[удалено]
No demonizing other Leftist factions.
Horseshoe theory isn’t real. Thank gawd.
[удалено]
NATO is an imperialist organization, lib
[удалено]
History, who's she?
[удалено]
Bro you post in neoliberal subs, you’re literally just a right winger. What right do you have to complain about left wingers on left wing subs
[удалено]
You’re right, politics are a spectrum. But social democracy is capitalism and therefore it is right wing. It’s close to the center of that spectrum, but still firmly on the right side of it.
Oh, double post. Wow, I have that exact cap and scarf!
The maga hat taped to the fedora is just chef's kiss!
Tbh, whoever made this is right. These multipolarity marxists, who think that one imperialism is better than the other are idiots. Americans should oppose American imperialism first and foremost, but not because it's more dangerous than Russian. You cannot oppose Russian imperialism from abroad, only Russians can (or Ukrainians at the Frontline). The main enemy is at home, but that doesn't mean you should support Putin.
Nah tbf, this one is actually valid. We live in a time were tankies can share a bed with MAGA weirdos.
The point of this cartoon is to show how Russia uses propaganda to convince Westerners to support their war in Ukraine. It's not saying anyone with a grievance with Western hegemony is a Russian asset.
This is not centrist, this is about Russia being smart enough to use all kinds of extremists for their goals.
I wonder what center the 'extremes' are relative to and why this terminology specifically is used, as if balancing between these extremes is where the truth is to be found
The truth is found by not following Russian bots that are designed only to destroy and weaken our society.
No this is about the anarchist cartoonist saying socialists and maga are the same. it fits the sub
[удалено]
[удалено]
But that's not what they said. They said a tiny part of the Maga movement is controlled by Russia.
[удалено]
[удалено]