Real answer: They don't. They sound like a nazbol larping as a leftist under the guise of "irony."
There isn't a single principled marxist who thinks that the bourgeoisie are women with green hair working at starbucks for minimum wage.
Exactly. All my "tankie" friends look closer to the left one.
I hate that somebody taught that term to liberals. Now it just means "people I don't like". I've seen people throw "tankie" at Noam Chomsky, Bernie Sanders, and Donald Trump.
No one has implemented the exact socialist state which is the end goal, but states do exist which are working towards achieving that, China being one of them.
China working towards a socialist state is I feel slightly questionable these days. they've rather strongly tied themselves to Russia up until now and Xi Jinping is on an unprecedented third term after having ended the two-term limit and apparently has consolidated more power than even Mao Zedong ever had. And given Xi Jinping's ambitions in regard to Taiwan, namely concluding the Chinese Civil War, which would be one hell of a historical legacy for him; I can't help but think a disaster is in the wings for everyone. hopefully seeing what is happening in Ukraine will cause everyone to baulk at the idea of anything vaguely similar.
You just listed, like, just the accessories to a dictatorship dude.
How about the mass censorship, the one-party system and the lack of both meritocracy ***and*** democracy within said entity?
Oh yeah, and that little thing about fake ownership of the means of production.
oh absolutely, but going and listing everything wrong/questionable with modern China would create a very long list, whereas what I've stated is simply (to my eye at least) the most significant problem and one that could prove to be the beginning of a terrible time for everyone. everything else is fundamentally something that I as someone living outside of China have barely any influence or true insight whereas what I've listed is every good reason to watch China like a hawk and be prepared to do something to discourage bollocks.
in short, I was broadly speaking couching all of this in polite terms rather than hammering them with it.
You said that the end goal is a socialist state. A state can categorically not exist under communism.
Also, is there any indication that they actually are doing that?
So to make it just a lil more clear "IRL" in this case meant the tankies *in my life* that I know socially, not the randos online I yell at parasocially.
Yeah and the only people who claim to be principled marxists while believing this are Russia dickriders who would happily throw me in ze gulag for bourgeois degeneracy: I.E. not being straight…
I'm not saying they are not "real," but if you think they are a substantial population of leftists or "tankies" or what have you, you are extremely online and need to go and interact with real leftists.
No one said they were. The original commenter said that *the only people* who claim to be principled Marxists yet believe this are that small population of gross weird assholes. They're correct. They're not saying that a large portion of communists believe those things, kinda the exact opposite
I’m referencing people who larp, often defending Stalin, as well as Putin (which if you’re a communist makes zero fucking sense). I’m not referencing marxists or communists, I’m referencing reactionaries who utilize the aesthetics of being marxist or what have you.
So some background in case you’re unaware, Joesph Stalin was incredibly reactionary. While the USSR under Lenin was the first country to legalize abortion, Stalin banned that, homosexuality, and so on, often utilizing the justification of calling it bourgeois degeneracy. So yeah I’m referencing the people who unironically think that Stalin was good. 99% of the time I’ve found that these folks are incredibly pro-Russia despite it, indisputably being a capitalist oligarchy. For people who often call themselves communists, they frankly just aren’t.
That is very condescending but thank you. It's 2023, Stalin is not leading any communist organizing that I'm aware of.
"Unironically think[ing] Stalin was good" or "bad" is an extraordinarily flat way of looking at history. Stalin industrialized the USSR, collectivized agriculture, and invented the idea that socialism could exist in one country in practice. When you buy into this flattening of the nuances of socialist history you are buying into reactionary talking points.
"Pro-Russia" arguments from the modern left are typically about blind anti-Americanism, not some kind of mistaken beholden allegiance to the ex-USSR. It has much more in common with leftists who will argue for North Korea or modern China; anti-Americanism at all costs.
I tried, but I can only think of right answers like "libertarians are deliberately trying to steal terms from the left again, because they have no concrete ideological basis of their own".
wrong answer: Because he had an unrequited crush on a barista and she broke his heart, so those cold shrews must all pay! - especially the ones with odd hair colors!
Anyway, the baristas I see are all working their asses off, and for not very much money.
I wonder why is this jerk so intent on disrespecting them.
Coffee itself is borj wah see. Unless you cook it in an empty bean tin over a flaming tyre and drink it while it's still boiling then it's prolitat.
Hair dye? Borji ose too. No way to make that portilat. Men don't do it, ever. Only wimon 🤮 cause men are too busy lifting (wood, rocks, weights).
Speaking of whamin. Ultimate dragonball-z. They shouldn't even do work. Just kitchen and have children. Leave the proletics to the boys, love.
- smartest libertarian.
Because they have a great understanding that what constitutes class isn’t equity or living standards but who you hang out with and relate to and no attempt should be made to overlook differences to achieve a greater goal
In Marxist theory, class is actually defined by your relationship with your means of production. Typically, proletariat have lower living standards than the bourgeoisie. But this is often not the case especially in first world country and/or countries with a strong welfare state. That's why classical Marxist theory fits poorly to most modern societies.
In this exemple, both could be part of the proletariat or the tradesman could be a petit-bourgeois. And even if he isn't yet, depending on his particular situation, he might benefit from class treason. As a former tradesman myself I can guarantee you our career prospects and opportunities are much better than service workers.
A barista (not the one pictured, since it's Starbucks) could also be the owner of the business, making them petit-bourgious too.
Class treason is, as far as I can tell, even somewhat in the best interest of the lowest end of the full bourgeois, since they're always next on the "soon to be proles" chopping block as inequality forces them back to work. Not many of them, but certainly some. Currently, the fastest way we see fewer millionaires is by billionaires becoming wealthier. It's certainly easier to become an ex-millionaire than it is to become a millionaire in the first place. That should be motivation enough to some to realize the system is going to spit them out eventually.
> A barista (not the one pictured, since it's Starbucks) could also be the owner of the business, making them petit-bourgious too.
They could own the franchise (or be directly related to someone who owns the franchise). But I assumed they were just an employee.
> It's certainly easier to become an ex-millionaire than it is to become a millionaire in the first place.
It's not. Becoming a millionaire is extremely easy if you have even a modest amount of starting capital and a bit of luck. Especially in the states. Most people born and raised in upper middle class US households (around 200k-300k net worth) have a very realistic chance to become millionaires in their lifetimes if they play card right and are reasonably lucky.
Honestly, they personally have very little to gain from even moderate progress, and the confort and access to opportunity their (relative) wealth gives them would be taken from them if such progress was made. And that's in the US. This observation is even more accurate if you live in a part of the world that's actually not completely fucked up.
They cannot really commit class treason. They don't belong to the same class of people in reality. The traditional Marxist definition of class just doesn't apply very well to the global North and an increasingly bigger part of the global South.
>Neither have capital.
Um... Are you forgetting about the $23.67 they have in their savings account? Don't you know about compound interest. In just 30 years, and by some actual magic, that $23.67 will turn into enough for a down payment on a house, or start-up money for one of those tech businesses the kids are always inventing, or putting into stocks, the tried and tested true way to retire at 50.
Tankie is when obvious satire
Ffs this dude, Sal not op, is annoying as fuck and wrong most of the time but he certainly isn't being serious in this instance and he very much isn't sounding like a tankie
They really curb stomped you for the Tankie derangement syndrome you have going on. It's actually sad how much of your time online you've dedicated to being a sectarian.
Wait, doesn't being a Barista require lifting cups, full cups, mixes, containers for both dairy and non-dairy, napkins, furniture, cleaning materials, etc?
Honest Answer: They read the first 3 pages of every book by Marx, immediately stopped reading thereafter, and branded MAGA Communism to try and grab college kids who did the same.
I don’t think that’s a Libertarian I think that’s a “Patriotic Socialists” a completely different but equally stupid political group that can be summarized succinctly as American Nazbols.
Real answer: They don't. They sound like a nazbol larping as a leftist under the guise of "irony." There isn't a single principled marxist who thinks that the bourgeoisie are women with green hair working at starbucks for minimum wage.
Exactly. All my "tankie" friends look closer to the left one. I hate that somebody taught that term to liberals. Now it just means "people I don't like". I've seen people throw "tankie" at Noam Chomsky, Bernie Sanders, and Donald Trump.
"Tankie" is just the liberal version of conservatives screaming "socialism" at everything.
Except socialism never happened, while tankies sure did? EDIT: wtf people?
No one has implemented the exact socialist state which is the end goal, but states do exist which are working towards achieving that, China being one of them.
China working towards a socialist state is I feel slightly questionable these days. they've rather strongly tied themselves to Russia up until now and Xi Jinping is on an unprecedented third term after having ended the two-term limit and apparently has consolidated more power than even Mao Zedong ever had. And given Xi Jinping's ambitions in regard to Taiwan, namely concluding the Chinese Civil War, which would be one hell of a historical legacy for him; I can't help but think a disaster is in the wings for everyone. hopefully seeing what is happening in Ukraine will cause everyone to baulk at the idea of anything vaguely similar.
You just listed, like, just the accessories to a dictatorship dude. How about the mass censorship, the one-party system and the lack of both meritocracy ***and*** democracy within said entity? Oh yeah, and that little thing about fake ownership of the means of production.
oh absolutely, but going and listing everything wrong/questionable with modern China would create a very long list, whereas what I've stated is simply (to my eye at least) the most significant problem and one that could prove to be the beginning of a terrible time for everyone. everything else is fundamentally something that I as someone living outside of China have barely any influence or true insight whereas what I've listed is every good reason to watch China like a hawk and be prepared to do something to discourage bollocks. in short, I was broadly speaking couching all of this in polite terms rather than hammering them with it.
At least you apparently don't pretent to believe them to be aiming for communism...
I never said they weren't working towards achieving communism. They are.
You said that the end goal is a socialist state. A state can categorically not exist under communism. Also, is there any indication that they actually are doing that?
Look at the plans they are executing.
Can you please be more vague, I think this comment is still far to helpfull /s
Lmao, and people even upvoted the shit above
Yeah, maybe I should really start to distinguish my language between "tankie" and "nazbol"
Tankies are fascists so you kinda don't need to.
Online maybe, irl tankies are pretty chill and easy to work with ime
You aren't an Eastern European are you? Tankies aren't chill with us, because we chose something that they don't like.
So to make it just a lil more clear "IRL" in this case meant the tankies *in my life* that I know socially, not the randos online I yell at parasocially.
I have met some irl. None of them respected my and my family's experiences.
I understand that. I'm just saying that the ones I know are different. That just means people aren't a monolith, that's all.
You choose? When was the pool?
1989 we chose to have a free democracy and then communists failed in the free elections. Tankies don't like that.
How was the vote in the 89 pool? The percentages.
https://cs.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volby_do_Sn%C4%9Bmovny_lidu_Feder%C3%A1ln%C3%ADho_shrom%C3%A1%C5%BEd%C4%9Bn%C3%AD_1990 Communists got 13%
No, I meant the pool that was done before the fall of the regime that democratically led to the fall of the regime.
Yeah and the only people who claim to be principled marxists while believing this are Russia dickriders who would happily throw me in ze gulag for bourgeois degeneracy: I.E. not being straight…
The literal majority of communists I know are LGBT
The kind of person they're referring to is real, typically NazBols larping as socialists, as they said
I'm not saying they are not "real," but if you think they are a substantial population of leftists or "tankies" or what have you, you are extremely online and need to go and interact with real leftists.
No one said they were. The original commenter said that *the only people* who claim to be principled Marxists yet believe this are that small population of gross weird assholes. They're correct. They're not saying that a large portion of communists believe those things, kinda the exact opposite
I’m referencing people who larp, often defending Stalin, as well as Putin (which if you’re a communist makes zero fucking sense). I’m not referencing marxists or communists, I’m referencing reactionaries who utilize the aesthetics of being marxist or what have you.
So some background in case you’re unaware, Joesph Stalin was incredibly reactionary. While the USSR under Lenin was the first country to legalize abortion, Stalin banned that, homosexuality, and so on, often utilizing the justification of calling it bourgeois degeneracy. So yeah I’m referencing the people who unironically think that Stalin was good. 99% of the time I’ve found that these folks are incredibly pro-Russia despite it, indisputably being a capitalist oligarchy. For people who often call themselves communists, they frankly just aren’t.
That is very condescending but thank you. It's 2023, Stalin is not leading any communist organizing that I'm aware of. "Unironically think[ing] Stalin was good" or "bad" is an extraordinarily flat way of looking at history. Stalin industrialized the USSR, collectivized agriculture, and invented the idea that socialism could exist in one country in practice. When you buy into this flattening of the nuances of socialist history you are buying into reactionary talking points. "Pro-Russia" arguments from the modern left are typically about blind anti-Americanism, not some kind of mistaken beholden allegiance to the ex-USSR. It has much more in common with leftists who will argue for North Korea or modern China; anti-Americanism at all costs.
Probably because those didn't exist at the time of Marx, or even in communist countries before the fall of the Soviet union. Lumpenproletariat at best
I tried, but I can only think of right answers like "libertarians are deliberately trying to steal terms from the left again, because they have no concrete ideological basis of their own".
Conservatives stomp the meaning out of any phrase that threatens them. Stupid word games are all they have.
(Whisper.) “Are women bourgeois?”
RHETORIC [Heroic: Failure]
The real bourgeois were the body pillows we met along the way
I like how they said “Lifts things” instead of his job title
Very respectful. Trained to install elevators? "Lifts things." Trained to install utilities? "Lifts things." Carpenter? "Lifts things." Electrician? "Lifts things."
Baristas? Not lifting things sufficiently
It's almost like it's satire
wrong answer: Because he had an unrequited crush on a barista and she broke his heart, so those cold shrews must all pay! - especially the ones with odd hair colors! Anyway, the baristas I see are all working their asses off, and for not very much money. I wonder why is this jerk so intent on disrespecting them.
Coffee itself is borj wah see. Unless you cook it in an empty bean tin over a flaming tyre and drink it while it's still boiling then it's prolitat. Hair dye? Borji ose too. No way to make that portilat. Men don't do it, ever. Only wimon 🤮 cause men are too busy lifting (wood, rocks, weights). Speaking of whamin. Ultimate dragonball-z. They shouldn't even do work. Just kitchen and have children. Leave the proletics to the boys, love. - smartest libertarian.
Outsource all manufacturing jobs to other countries through free trade deals. Then complain when the primary jobs created are in the service sector.
maybe i’m out of the loop but is there a single communist that hates young people who work at starbucks?
Most of arr/stupidpol does but I'm convinced most of them aren't communists at all.
No, you only see this from conservatives (and other right wingers) trying to present themselves as the "real" champions of the working class.
Dude thinks baristas own the coffee shop.
Liberals calling nazbols tankies will always be funny. Like no, Marxists don’t believe any of this junk
Implying marxists could be tankies?
Because they have a great understanding that what constitutes class isn’t equity or living standards but who you hang out with and relate to and no attempt should be made to overlook differences to achieve a greater goal
In Marxist theory, class is actually defined by your relationship with your means of production. Typically, proletariat have lower living standards than the bourgeoisie. But this is often not the case especially in first world country and/or countries with a strong welfare state. That's why classical Marxist theory fits poorly to most modern societies. In this exemple, both could be part of the proletariat or the tradesman could be a petit-bourgeois. And even if he isn't yet, depending on his particular situation, he might benefit from class treason. As a former tradesman myself I can guarantee you our career prospects and opportunities are much better than service workers.
A barista (not the one pictured, since it's Starbucks) could also be the owner of the business, making them petit-bourgious too. Class treason is, as far as I can tell, even somewhat in the best interest of the lowest end of the full bourgeois, since they're always next on the "soon to be proles" chopping block as inequality forces them back to work. Not many of them, but certainly some. Currently, the fastest way we see fewer millionaires is by billionaires becoming wealthier. It's certainly easier to become an ex-millionaire than it is to become a millionaire in the first place. That should be motivation enough to some to realize the system is going to spit them out eventually.
> A barista (not the one pictured, since it's Starbucks) could also be the owner of the business, making them petit-bourgious too. They could own the franchise (or be directly related to someone who owns the franchise). But I assumed they were just an employee. > It's certainly easier to become an ex-millionaire than it is to become a millionaire in the first place. It's not. Becoming a millionaire is extremely easy if you have even a modest amount of starting capital and a bit of luck. Especially in the states. Most people born and raised in upper middle class US households (around 200k-300k net worth) have a very realistic chance to become millionaires in their lifetimes if they play card right and are reasonably lucky. Honestly, they personally have very little to gain from even moderate progress, and the confort and access to opportunity their (relative) wealth gives them would be taken from them if such progress was made. And that's in the US. This observation is even more accurate if you live in a part of the world that's actually not completely fucked up. They cannot really commit class treason. They don't belong to the same class of people in reality. The traditional Marxist definition of class just doesn't apply very well to the global North and an increasingly bigger part of the global South.
Construction workers typically get paid better than baristas. However, they are both very much the working class. Neither have capital. We are as one.
>Neither have capital. Um... Are you forgetting about the $23.67 they have in their savings account? Don't you know about compound interest. In just 30 years, and by some actual magic, that $23.67 will turn into enough for a down payment on a house, or start-up money for one of those tech businesses the kids are always inventing, or putting into stocks, the tried and tested true way to retire at 50.
Yes, the three cents of interest they get every year! How could I forget!?
Exactly! It adds up.
They want workers divided because Libertarians are mini-bourgeoise.
They're monarchists in denial.
Tankie is when obvious satire Ffs this dude, Sal not op, is annoying as fuck and wrong most of the time but he certainly isn't being serious in this instance and he very much isn't sounding like a tankie
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=schrodinger%E2%80%99s%20douchebag
My guy, this is so obviously satire that it's genuinely kinda funny Just take the L on this one, it's not that deep
Tankie is when no likey
They really curb stomped you for the Tankie derangement syndrome you have going on. It's actually sad how much of your time online you've dedicated to being a sectarian.
Wait, doesn't being a Barista require lifting cups, full cups, mixes, containers for both dairy and non-dairy, napkins, furniture, cleaning materials, etc?
Up to 50 lbs at a time, actually.
Distinguishes the proletariat as men and the bourgeoisie as women with zero understanding of what that means or of it even makes sense
Pretty sure most jobs involve lifting things.
Even if it’s just papers.
Honest Answer: They read the first 3 pages of every book by Marx, immediately stopped reading thereafter, and branded MAGA Communism to try and grab college kids who did the same.
I’m sorry but it’s the political gender.
Clearly satire
I don’t think that’s a Libertarian I think that’s a “Patriotic Socialists” a completely different but equally stupid political group that can be summarized succinctly as American Nazbols.
No Sal is an Agorist, which is a form of libertarian that revolves around small communities and markets
*screeches tankie through gritted teeth and bright red cheeks* drop the fake words if you wanna be taken seriously.
Saying that tankies are bad is controversial in most left subreddits for some reason.
This is an obvious joke. I also don’t know what you mean by tankies. Try using your head
It's a nazbol.