Like what?

Capitalism has liberal democracy.

Are you saying that because Workers have absolutely no economic control in Capitalism, it’s more democratic than when they do? Are you genuinely making that argument?

Why? Capitalism can’t be democratic.

Socialists support some form of Workers owning the Means of Production, of various types.

Communists are Marxists, that advocate for a specific form of Socialism, a worker state, that will eventually result in a Stateless, Classless, Moneyless society.

Tankie has been used to slander all manner of leftists, but the number of people that actually fit the definition of the slander is very small. Many people who do not fit that actual definition are still called a tankie.

What constitutes “fairly?” Maybe because I am on Lemmy.ml and thus can see Hexbear and Lemmygrad, I don’t think I’ve seen many people genuinely refusing to condemn horrible or tragic events within Communist countries or by Communists. Perhaps a vast minority, but at that point, why is this even an issue in the first place?

Are there examples of “good” Communists that aren’t tankies that you can point me to?

Agreed.

Sure, but I mean at what point, right?

To cut to the chase, I’m asking what specifically separates Tankies from Communists. Where is the line drawn? I see a lot of people (myself included) labeled a tankie for recommending people read Marx, or saying that Lenin was a Marxist, regardless of if you agree with him or not.

At what point would a Communist be considered a tankie?

When does Communism become authoritarian? Like, where in the process?

I agree with promoting inter-connectedness, I am on Lemmy.ml as opposed to grad or hexbear precisely because I believe in fostering that connection. I do think it’s more likely .world defeds, but currently they want to maintain that same vision of interconnectedness. I can see .world putting it to a vote and letting users defed, to save face, eventually.

I agree, if there does become a multi-polar Lemmy, there will be healthier growth from the more open instances.

People on Hexbear, .ml, and Lemmygrad are regularly critical of Russia and China. They critically support them in their efforts against Imperialism along Lenin’s definitions, which is basically Hyper-Capitalism, because they believe countries under the thumb of Imperialism cannot become Socialist, and Imperialist countries will not become Socialist until after they lose the countries they extract from.

Let’s analyze it.

Reddit is declining in a way liberals can’t deny. The more ideological among these liberals attempt to leave, but without theory, without knowledge of Marxism, or even Anarchism, without a firm understanding of Historical and Dialectical Materialism, their world view is framed in a manner that casts Capitalism as bad, in an almost Ultraleftist manner, but Red Scare propaganda still makes Marxism spooky.

They occupy a space that considers Capitalist countries with pure nuance and critical support, but only judge leftist movements as though they are Ultras, and nothing is satisfactory.

From there, Liberals seek a replacement, and further still they don’t quite accept federation, so they go to the largest generalist instance. This is Lemmy.world, so they get to have a space filled with ex-redditors kicked out by Capitalism’s failings, but unwilling to embrace any actual alternative, occupying a weird middle ground.

Therefore, Lemmy.world appeals to radical, theoryless liberals, with no specific or niche interests, and creates an echo-chamber around that specific anti-specificity.

Just my 2 cents.

Dialectically, I believe eventually .world will defed from .ml, or vice-versa, from some unimportant inciting incident, creating a multi-polar Lemmy, so to speak, but that’s a bit odd to say directly to you. Either way, I see a contradiction that appears to be growing, so Dialectically there will likely be a shift from the quantitative to qualitative, so to speak.

They never said they supported authoritarianism, they claim to support democracy.

As for Stalin support, I believe it’s being intentionally inflamatory and framed against support for a democratic state precisely to challenge the reader’s assumptions about how the USSR actually functioned. I don’t take it as saying “yes, Stalin absolutely should have recriminalized homosexuality” or anything, but we can’t know beyond what they have stated.

They don’t count as a tankie then, they quite plainly told you they wanted a democratically controlled state. Or is democracy authoritarian, in your view?

Seems more intentionally inflamatory than anything else, considering they literally told you what they wanted before that line.

What do you believe Tankies actually desire?

Where did they say they support authoritarianism?

Aren’t we all…

If you oppose top-down structures, then why do you support Capitalism over Communism?

Imma be honest chief, I’m just a nerd for Socialism and Communism. That’s really it, haha.

Let me know if you have any questions!

You can absolutely do that, but it may be extremely difficult.

I would personally recommend starting with The Principles of Communism and then following it up with How Marxism Works. Then, you can dive into Wage Labor and Capital and Value, Price, and Profit.

With the easy overviews of Marxism as a whole, and the Marxist critique of Capitalism out of the way, I would go to Socialism: Utopian and Scientific for philosophy, and Critique of the Gotha Programme for Marx’s vision of what Socialism may look like. Read the Communist Manifesto now, where you have the background knowledge to fully understand the text and appreciate its fire.

Optionally, add Lenin here. Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism explains how Capitalism has grown since Marx, using ideas laid out by Marx but not fully observable until Lenin. I would say this is actually the most important work for understanding Modern Capitalism, but since it builds on Marx, it’s important to read this one after Marx. The State and Revolution is Lenin’s other major work, and it goes over the strategy used during the Russian Revolution. Important for historical context, even if you disagree with Lenin here.

All of this combined is, I believe, shorter than 1 full volume of Capital.

Hope that helps!

Good!

Let me know if you want some basic Marxist recommendations.