• WaxedWookie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        39
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Look at how much they care about worker enfranchisement in the totalitarian regimes they idolise.

        They’re just red fascists.

      • SasquatchBanana@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        They use left wing populism to hide their authoritarianism (right wing). The literal Nazis did the exact same thing. We even see it in their names.

        If you are simping for Putin/Russia or China, you don’t care nor know what communism is.

        • OldPain@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          No they aren’t. Some shady fucking people here playing opposite day or something.

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

            Your political ideology can use whatever leftist symbolism it wants to, but if the system you enact is an authoritarian, top down hierarchy that supresses the will of the masses in favor of a privileged elite, then you aren’t on the Left.

            Even Marx and Engels at their most statist wouldn’t be in the same zipcode as Lenin et. al.

            To be on the left means being for democracy from the bottom up and being agaisnt the concentration of money and power in the hands of a few.

        • primal_buddhist@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not actually true if we mean left as in ownership by the people and the right means ownership by capital.

          Authoritarian or totalitarian are not the same as right.

          • gammasfor@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            There is an argument that tankies aren’t exactly ownership by the people.

            Like you don’t look at the USSR and think "oh yeah the people really had ownership over their means of production*.

            Ownership by the people implies the people have a say.

            • socsa@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              They are revolution fetishists. That’s why orthodox MLs repeatedly fail at actual statecraft - because they study revolution, and often get angry when that fan service gets interrupted by conversation about policy.

        • letsgocrazy@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s not “right wing”

          It’s just totalitarian fascism.

          We need to let go of this stupid idea that only right wing politics ends up in totalitarian fascism.

          ANY FORM OF IDEOLOGY OR BELIEF CAN LEAD TO FASCISM.

          “Love thy neighbour as thyself” can lead to totalitarian fascism.

          No matter how benign the belief, someone can turn it into fascism.

          • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 year ago

            As far as I can tell, your intended meaning is absolutely correct, but you have some of the terminology wrong: fascism is an explicitly right wing form of oppressive authoritarianism. The extreme left can be authoritarian and oppressive, but never fascist.

            Stalinism and the ideology of Pol Pot and his Khmer Rouge are notorious examples of tankies: left wing fanatics who engage in oppressive authoritarianism and violent persecution of anyone different from their narrow definition of the ideal citizen, often using arbitrary metrics just like fascists do.

            Is the end result the same for an LGBTQ+ person, a pacifist or anyone else demonised by all forms of oppressive authoritarianism? Yes.

            But that does not make the ideologies identical and the distinction is important because the differences mean that different tools are more effective in combating one than the other.

        • LewysHamilton@lemmynsfw.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          If someone claims leftist standings and then says anyone who disagrees should die that is by definition right wing.

          What definition is that? Authoritarianism is independent of right and left

          • Maeve@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            From Wikipedia: in psychology, the right-wing authoritarian (RWA) is a personality type that describes somebody who is highly submissive to their authority figures, acts aggressively in the name of said authorities, and is conformist in thought and behavior.[1] The prevalence of this personality type in a population varies from culture to culture, as a person’s upbringing and education play a strong role in determining whether somebody develops this sort of personality.[2]

            The right-wing authoritarian personality was defined by Bob Altemeyer as a refinement of the research of Theodor Adorno. Adorno was the first to propose the existence of an authoritarian personality as part of an attempt to explain the rise of fascism and the Holocaust, but his theory fell into disfavor because it was associated with Freudian psychoanalysis. Altemeyer nonetheless felt that Adorno was on to something, and so developed a more scientifically rigorous theory.

            The RWA scale was designed to measure authoritarianism in North America. It has proven to be similarly reliable in English-speaking countries such as Australia, but less effective in other countries such as France due to cultural differences and translation issues.[3]

              • Maeve@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                No i didn’t, i just realized where part of the problem lies. That you don’t know anything about communication being a two way avenue is your issue abcs you’reas obnoxious as the people you criticize. Nothing changes anything about what I’ve already argued, and your arguments are lacking since they’re only insults.