I understand, but once you cool down I think it’s worth revisiting, if not with anyone here, on your own.

Maybe hold off on using terminology like “degenerate,” it has fascist implications. I agree with the sentiment, but we should be careful with wording.

Tankie means something specific, a sympathizer for communist or aesthetically communist states which lack either free and fair elections, a freedom to criticize the government, or just general human rights.

I’d like to offer a correction:

Tankie means something specific, a sympathizer for socialist states which are alleged by liberals to lack either free and fair elections, a freedom to criticize the government, or just general human rights.

I fully agree that the definition you gave is the one that wielders of the pejorative believe to be true, but I’d argue my definition is more accurate as it accounts for the fact that “tankies” do not believe the allegations against socialist states to be true or to be highly exaggerated and removed from historical context in liberal narratives.

Whenever a socialist is accused of being a “tankie,” they generally have 1 of 3 choices:

1. Attack the validity of the pejorative as a real ideology

2. Accept the pejorative, and use this to move onto discussing specifics, forcing the accuser’s hand

3. Accept that “tankies” can and do exist, but try to convince your interlocutor that you aren’t one of them.

The third is the most common among western leftists, and also happens to be the most self-defeating. Only options 1 and 2 actually present a path forward for socialists. You can replace “tankie” above with “woke” and the argument still applies, you can either own the label or attack the validity of the label to move forward.

You don’t have to respond, but I do want to echo QinShiHuangsSchlong’s point: many hierarchies exist due to necessity or sheer practicality in a way that far supercedes any problems arising from being a hierarchy. For example, horizontally organizing a nuclear power plant is a recipe for disaster, and managing and coordinating the production and logistics chain of sufficiently complex but useful technology like smartphones requires vertical elements to administration.

The fact of this then brings us to the Marxist critique, that hierarchy isn’t the problem inherently, but class and the products of class society.

QinShiHuangsSchlong beat me to the punch, there are countless modern Marxists and Marxists since Lenin that have continued to apply the Marxist method to new eras and new conditions. Marxism-Leninism is referred to as an immortal science because it’s based on an ever-adapting framework for understanding the world, dialectical materialism, which in all this time have proven adaptable and fundamentally correct. We may teach Marxism in a new way with new conditions as we discover new eras, but the baseline is still applicable and necessary.

I won’t retread what QinShiHuangsSchlong already said very well, I want to expand by saying I don’t find it compelling at all when someone uses the “read theory” argument. Essentially, it says “I can’t argue with you well, so I recommend you look into those who can.” Demeaning someone and then giving them homework is a horrible way to get them to do so!

One of the best ways to comprehend theory is to try to simplify it for others, and be capable of clearly expressing your points without relying on “quote-mining” or “phrasemongering.”

This isn’t an argument against theory, but in favor of more effective discussion, as I was once extremely guilty of dumping recommendations for Marxist theory without properly explaining it, causing the argument to slide off like water on a windowpane. It also assumes a lack of competence on the other party’s part, which can quickly backfire if it indeed turns out that they know what they are talking about (such as QinShiHuangsSchlong here).

“Defending” genocide? Absolutely not. Genocide is the one of the greatest of all crimes against humanity, so when accusations of genocide are falsely levied they should then be resolutely denounced, lest they undermine real genocide, such as what Palestinians face at the hands of the Zionist entity. I have no shame for dispelling atrocity propaganda that undermines existing struggles, same as I would for the supposed “white genocide” in South Africa.

Just as “white genocide” was atrocity propaganda against those fighting apartheid, so too is the Xinjiang genocide narrative a political creation, with definite goals. Xinjiang is a key region in the Belt and Road Initiative, bridging the East to the West. Xinjiang is a key artery in the new multipolar era, and the West was hoping to foment radicalized elements to sever the artery and bleed the project dry.

When the CPC responded not with guns and tanks but with education centers and job opportunities, the West switched tactics to alleging “genocide,” spearheaded by a lone christofascist paid propagandist named Adrian Zenz.

Today, the de-radicalization program has worked. Violent attacks are near 0, and Uyghur culture and identity are preserved and celebrated. I recommend reading Xinjiang: A Report and Resource Compilation if you wish to learn what’s actuallu going on in Xinjiang and how it developed historically.

China is “authoritarian” from the perspective of capitalists, but liberating for the working classes. China is not committing genocide. Chinese citizens can and do critique the government, what’s often censored is reactionary views or capitalists trying to foment liberalization. The markets are not free, and that’s a good thing, as it’s key to the success of China’s Socialist Market Economy.

As you should, it’s very in-depth and deserves it.

Personally, I prefer Xinjiang: A Report and Resource Compilation. It’s better than that memoir by a Statesian politician, and uses a combination of western reporting and hard empirical data.

Norway is a dictatorship of capital, and depends on imperialism to subsidize their saftey nets.

There are some Chinese users, but the majority are just communists from different countries, not neceessarily western ones. Lemmy was made by communists, so there are more of us here.

Communists don’t idealize socialist countries, not are we utopians.

I don’t really notice that. As you’re on Lemmy.world, it seems more likely that you have a fictional idea of Hexbear in your head that doesn’t map to reality. Further, you don’t need to use ableism to make your points, if me pointing that out is considered “bad-faith,” then perhaps you should look inward first.

How is Hexbear a “toxic pile of feces?” It’s a group of lefties, you’re already federated with instances known for post-stalking like Feddit.org and sh.itjust.works.

What’s shit about communists?

On my part, or janewaydidnothingwrong’s?

No, it’s one of the best countries in the world for the working classes at the present moment. It’s regularly improving, and though it has its issues, it’s doing well to work through them, which is more than can be said of the dying western empire.

Same, I wouldn’t bet on it either.

There’s a decent chance they come around to being a leftist, so it helps to point out where they actually do align with leftists.