• ickplant@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      How often do you see these views in daily media? Cause I see right-wing rhetoric that’s pretty fucked up on TV and in newspaper and on the streets. but I only see tankies in the most forgotten corners of the internet.

        • ickplant@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Key word being “here.” They represent a small portion of a small internet community. How often do you hear tankie views presented seriously on mainstream news?

          • EvilHaitianEatingYourCat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s what i am claiming here. France Insoumise is 3rd largest political force in France, they are pretty vocal in their “criticism of main establishment” which translates to “US/Israel bad, Russia and China good”

      • 𝔊𝔦𝔫𝔧𝔲𝔱𝔰𝔲@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        If social “media” falls under daily media, then I see it all the time. Go on X. Or Reddit. Or Instagram. or TikTok. It’s not hard to find some pretty radical leftist opinions in popular spaces nowadays, and like most spaces centered around radical ideology, you’ll get some genocide deniers in the mix.

        I never really got the whole “leftists voices not being heard” schtick. There are tons of leftist flavored crazies online, and they tend to be very vocal, just like the right wing crazies.

    • Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t see tankies/red-browns are leftists. Ultimately they overwhelmingly support authoritarian dictatorships, and that just doesn’t feel very lefty for me

      • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Well left/right isn’t authoritarian/libertarian, it’s collectivist economics/individualist economics.

        Authoritarians with collectivist ideals are authoritarian leftists, i.e tankies,

        Libertarians with collectivist ideals are libertarian leftists i.e anarchocommunists,

        Authoritarians with individualist ideals are authoritarian right, i.e monarchism,

        Libertarians with individualist ideals are libertarian right, i.e anarchocapitalism.

        Of course there are more examples of ideologies for each quadrant with varying levels of “auth-lib” or “left-right,” but just to give you some idea of the differences. There’s also auth-lib centers, like National Socialists on the auth side and agorists or anarchoprimativists on the lib side.

        Of course judge all of the above groups to your own accord, but it isn’t as simple as “left means libertarian” unless you think anarchocapitalism is a leftist ideal, which it by definition isn’t.

        • Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Yeah, I didn’t elaborate enough. If you use left-right as people usually do, as an economic position, with communism and socialism being on the left, I don’t see how that leftist position could in any way be compatible with authoritarianism in any way. The core tenet of socialism is worker collectively owning means of production and making decisions about their workspace and getting the benefits of their labour. The core tenet of communism is stateless society (among other core tenets). Both are at the core incompatible with authoritarian style government of any sorts.
          You could just be socialist for example, but tankies are very keen on adding dictatorship on top, which means that they either don’t understand what socialism is, or do but for them loving “strong hand” is more important, and that makes them “non leftists” as far as I can see it.
          It works for the other side of the mirror, but kinda less obviously so. Capitalism either requires on necessarily leads to accumulation of power by the few, because money is power in capitalism, and accumulating capital is the only function of capital, so anarchocapitalism is just a precursor to oligarchy (or neofeudalism in it’s worst case).

          • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 months ago

            It’s literally they want “what is best for you whether you like it or not, and we’ll kill you to give it to you.” Tankies are leftists, even if they’re the “Harvey Dent’s left half personality” of the left. “Walks like the left, talks like the left, but also kills people = leftist that kills people.”

            • Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              Again, it’s physically, dialectically, impossible to simultaneously be for “workers own and collectively operate the means of production” and “unelected autocratic dictatorship owns and operates means of production”. It’s either or, there is no shared ownership between the two. Same goes for the question “who is in charge of fruits of the labour” and “who is in charge of natural resources”. It’s either collective, by any mean, or autocrat.
              So when they say “I want autocracy” they necessarily pick one of those, and it’s not one that is called socialism (or communism for that matter).

              • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                11 months ago

                If “the party” is “the worker’s party,” or “the collective,” as has historically been the case, it absolutely can be. It’s like the rightoids claiming the nazis were socialist, they just want to pretend the worst parts of their ideology are actually someone else’s ideology instead of just admitting “yes, X can be done wrong, it can also be done this other way which I think is right.”

                The fact that tankies are leftists isn’t an admonishment of leftists at large, the leftists at large’s inability to admit tankies are “the demon within themselves” (in terms of whole party not in you necessarily,) is however.

                Of course, many on the right and left define their side as “everything good,” and the other as “everything bad,” so, if you’re one of those, then yeah I guess, whatever dude. In any case this conversation seems pointless, you’ve determined that “leftist authoritarians can’t be leftists frfr” and nothing I say will make you see just how silly that is.