www.reddit.com

I apologise if I say some dumb shit. I'm annoyed because these type of people really annoy me. I also need to preface that I know these people represent the absolute minority of decolonialists and that decolonialism isn't "evicting all the white people." I'm also gonna start this with the epic one time I'm ever going to say this but I do agree with Vaush on the very specific point that things are never going to return to the way they were before colonialism. That there is never going to be a situation where natives are ever fully in control of their land again. That's not a good thing, but it's reality. Not in the USA, not in New Zealand, not in my country of Australia. Indigenous people in colonised countries like this are never going to regain full and total control of their land. It is not possible given the conditions of the countries, and is never going to be possible. Not because I think colonialism was a good thing, but because I consider myself a materialist and materialism means analysing the material conditions of reality in order to develop ideas based on facts, not absurdist moral superiority and rabid internet dipshits. This post on r/sendinthetanks was met with people who said something reasonable, and something I think anyone here who has the most basic understanding of materialism and material conditions will understand. It was also full of people who parrot a point I see as so absurdly stupid that I need to bring it up. The people who believe that this mass eviction of 'settlers' is justified. In this case, came from parentis_shotgun on Reddit and was backed up with the same tired moronic points in order to refute the reasonable arguments made by people who believe that this mass eviction horseshit is both anti-materialist and morally unjustified. One of these points of justification for the mass eviction is: > How decolonization proceeds is not for the settlers to dictate. This point has been used many times as a "get out of corner free" card whenever someone is presented with two questions they clearly cannot answer, and are as follows: - 1) Logistically, how are you going to deport 150+ million people who are deemed 'settlers' from the USA. - 2) What justifies this position? How is it ethical or feasible? These questions are hit with the previously mentioned response, which doesn't answer the question, instead basing their position on one of absurdist idealism rather than practical materialism. Since if you're advocating for the idea that 150+ million people should be deported, it's obviously hard to explain to some coping whitey how that's possible, so rather than actually doing so...they simply refuse to answer. They may claim that is because it's not up to them and rather the delegation should be directed towards an indigenous person. But that's a bullshit facade, in reality, it's because they know their suggestion is absurd. They never explain the logistical reasons, they simply delegate this to some hypothetical indigenous person. This hypothetical indigenous person is, supposedly, infallible. Which is idealist bullshit. An indigenous person would fair no better at logistically trying to evict 150+ million people from the USA than a 'settler', nor does the fact they are indigenous, in my opinion, grant them the moral right to do so. If you push for, advocate, or defend a preposed idea. You are expected to explain the logistics behind that idea. It has nothing to do with who would be responsible for the idea, it has everything to do with the physical impossibility of the idea being implemented. But of course, they know this, they simply choose to ignore it because it points out their absurd idealism. It also rests on the inherent, I believe, flawed idea I mentioned idea that an indigenous person would be infallible and objectively correct when it comes to this hypothetical mass deportation. Nobody, whether they are native, a settler, or anything else, is infallible and should be followed based on their ancestry. Furthermore, I do not think that the fact they're the descendents of colonialists justifies them being deported. And I do not think that someone people indigenous justifies them having the power, authority, or moral ground to evict these 'settlers'. There are ways to remove the privilege of these 'settlers' that don't involve shipping them off to Europe. In pretty much every time it has happened in history, mass deportations have been horrific crimes filled with brutality. Whether it be the expulsion of Jews from countries, the expulsion of Palestinians from Israel, or even the expulsion of Native Americans during colonialism. I believe that this championed expulsion of 'settlers' from the USA would be just as bad. I'm sure that might be a controversial opinion, and I don't want to hear shit about "YOU'RE SAYING COLONIALISM AND ANTI-COLONIALISM ARE THE SAME THING!" because this has nothing to do with ideological reasoning. I don't think there is a single moral justification that supports evicting 150+ million people from a country, whether it be colonial, anti-colonial or any other reason. That is such a colossal action of such drastic proportions that these people are championing under the masquerade of "if the indigenous people want it", which of course means they want it, since you cannot blindly support such an action without being complicit in it. Humans are not weeds. We are not invasive species. Once humanity has been established, it cannot simply be removed like you would a pest. These descendents of settlers are established in the USA, New Zealand, Australia, etc. And they're going to remain there. Whether this is a good thing or bad thing is irrelevant, it is the facts we face, and we must base our opinions on facts, not chase alternative history scenarios. parentis-shotgun so eloquently explained their nonsensical viewpoint in this section of a reply, the chain of which you can fully read [here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/sendinthetanks/comments/pupqrf/psa_for_vaushites/he5d0ra/) > It includes the return of stolen land, its up to them to decide what they want to do with it, not pearl clutching westerners like youreself terrified at the prospect of having indigenous people fully control their land. Who the fuck are you to dictate terms to them? Full control does not mean that people can simply evict others on a whim. This neo-landlord bullshit is unacceptable. There will never be an ethnic group I believe are justified in holding the power to evict another ethnic group. There is not and should not be some equilibrium eye-for-an-eye bullshit. If the collective terms of this hypothetical situation where indigenous people have the capability (or even desire, since I think most native people are content with the settlers by this point and simply want equal rights) to hold authority over the people deemed 'colonialists' include a clause calling for their total mass eviction of said 'settlers', then their terms are wrong. Full stop. That is not dictating terms, and if it is dictating terms, then the right to dictate those terms comes from the fact that humans are not a fucking cane toads and that they shouldn't be forced back to Europe for the crime of descending from some colonialist. Instead I ask, who are *they* to dictate such terms? What moral justification do they have to do something that is so heinous? That brings me to their second argument, and their usual answer to question 2. > Were the indigenous people bothered when they were the victims of colonialism and theft of land? Which is a fallacious argument. They are correct in that the colonialism of the USA, Australia, New Zealand, etc was incredibly brutal and a crime that has still not fully been fixed. But their use as justification for the mass eviction of 'settlers' is absurd. And I'm sure you all know why. Because crimes of the past do not justify crimes of the present. And hopefully we can all agree that a mass deportation of all white people from the USA would go down in history as an extremely brutal crime. And in my opinion, an unnecessary one. One crime does not justify another, this obviously works both ways. Just as it was a horrible and unjustifiable crime for colonialists to evict the indigenous peoples. Deep down, again, I think they know this, they simply cannot accept that the viewpoints they hold are nonsensical and rather than swallow their pride, become zealous idiots hoping to have some form of moral superiority so they can blast everyone who disagrees with their anti-materialist bullshit. We must not reject reality. Reality is that colonialism happened, indigenous peoples were the victims of genocides, and that we are living in a world where many nations are now mostly inhabited by the descendents of non-indigenous Europeans. This is reality, this will always be reality, and to suggest otherwise is to reject the material conditions of the world. As a sort of general summary, I need to stress this. These people do not represent anti-colonialism, however, they do give anti-colonialism a bad name and are butcherers of Marxism with their idealist, anti-materialist horseshit. These people do not represent anti-colonialism. They do, however, represent anti-materialist zealots whose viewpoints are incorrect for the reasons I laid out. In short, parentis_shotgun is full of shit. Apologies if I rambled a bit at times, I just really think I needed to explain why the people who support this proposal are wrong.

[ARCHIVED] Shit Fascists Say The_Lobster_Emperor • 3 years ago • 100%

I'm upset, I'm sad, I feel threatened. Someone in my Discord server, THE TANK ZONE, has doctored a fake Discord status against me in order to portray me as an anti-Semite, and posted it onto anti-communist (IE: Fascist) subreddits, specifically r/Enough_Commie_Spam, r/AntiComAction, r/Enough_Sanders_Spam and r/fragilecommunism. Luckily, after I reported the posts and messaged their admins, it seems to have been removed from r/Enough_Commie_Spam, r/fragilecommunism and r/Enough_Sanders_Spam. Obviously, this has never been my Discord status. But the fact someone is so fucking pathetic that they felt the need to fabricate evidence against me. The post is still active on r/AntiComAction: https://old.reddit.com/r/AntiComAction/comments/psbrc7/and_here_we_observe_a_tankie_red_fascist_in_their/ The post was also crossposted to r/tankiejerk by an account made 11 hours ago, that I suspect is an alt of u/thebigkahuna005: https://www.reddit.com/r/tankiejerk/comments/psma6k/admin_of_a_tankie_server_spouting_acting_like_a/ I reported the account to the Reddit admins for defamation and harassment. Their response? To say that the messages were not harassment and then permanently suspend the throwaway account I used to defend myself. I know this is internet shit, but I am so upset. How can someone be so morally bankrupt as to fake a screenshot against me and *not* suddenly realise that "Hang on, maybe our beliefs are based on a foundation of lies"? It's mean, it's defamatory, it's slanderous. Anyone who has a Reddit account, please report not only the account responsible, u/thebigkahuna005, but their post, and r/AntiComAction for their part in leaving up the post even despite my attempts to have it removed. I am disgusted, upset and infuriated that someone could be such a vile piece of shit as to create a fake post portraying me as an anti-Semite. **EDIT:** I believe that I found the two people responsible for this, TRX and Priest of Piedot.

Basically r/SmugIdeologyMan but it's for tankies The_Lobster_Emperor • 4 years ago • 100%

r/SmugIdeologyMan is doomed, I was the last bastion against liberalism.

www.theage.com.au

The situation in Armenia seems complicated right now. We do not know for sure right now if the coup has succeeded or failed. Coups generally are an assault on democracy, even bourgeois democracy. So I'm hoping it does not succeed, the Armenian people have suffered enough.

Communism101 The_Lobster_Emperor • 4 years ago • 100%

Now I don't mean "wage slaves" or anything of the like, I mean literal slaves like in the south of the USA before the Civil War and slaves in the markets in Libya. Are they considered part of the proletariat?

[ARCHIVED] Shit Fascists Say The_Lobster_Emperor • 4 years ago • 83%

"What's the deal with eugenics you evil fucking tankie?" - Kenetic Kups Given the fact he supports eugenics, mass population transfers in the name of "security", thinks that an oligarchy that rules over everyone can be policed into being "morally righteous and intelligent" as well as the fact they have childish robocop fantasies as though we're in the year 20XX, it's safe to say this guy is not only an idiot, but heavily inclined towards fascist ideas too.

news.cgtn.com

Discuss.

Communism101 The_Lobster_Emperor • 4 years ago • 93%

Sorry if this isn't fully relevant, but no where else to ask it. So I've ran into some technocrats a few times who proudly proclaim the achievements of technocracy. Naturally, the ideology seems opposed to communism, which suggests it is a bourgeois ideology. What is technocracy, is it good or bad, and what are the best arguments to refute it?

Communism101 The_Lobster_Emperor • 4 years ago • 85%

Pretty much asking general questions about the "Holodomor." Was it a deliberate genocide? What factors contributed to the famine? Why is it seem as a deliberate genocide today? Please provide sources to every claim you make. Cheers.

www.abc.net.au

Australian water should not and must not be considered a commodity, neither China nor the USA have any true entitlement to the water of one of the most drought affected continents on the planet! Investors and the Coalition *must* treat Australia and her water with the respect they deserve, but instead our most crucial resource is being sold off to foreign investors. Disgusting.

Communism The_Lobster_Emperor • 4 years ago • 94%

mkorostoff.github.io

There is no need or genuine reason for so few people to have so much wealth! EAT THE RICH!

The statement is in the Burmese/Myanmar language, but this may include new information/perspective on the coup. Asking on Reddit for a direct translation. Will post once obtained. Here's a Google translation, which doesn't seem too choppy: > Statement of the Burmese Communist Party on the current situation - 1/2021 > > Date : 31-1-2021 > > "The 2008 constitution is the mother law of all laws and if it is not respected, it must be repealed," said Brigadier General Min Aung Hlaing. Then In Naypyidaw, where security is tight, there are reports of a meeting between military representatives and the NLD. The military has called for a postponement of parliament, with expressions of reluctance to accept the election results. > > These actions forced the NLD to sign the first coup d'état of 1958, in which Tate Sane's son U Nu was forced to sign a coup d'état. Is it a turning point in history? Under 2008, all governments came under threat from military rule. Bullying, coercion, coercion, coercion, coercion, coercion The military envoy will continue to face control. It is clear that the reconciliation policy has failed. How to respond to this is an important issue. > > It will not be easy to sustain long-term problems if the NLD officials do not show such an important power issue to the people. We need to not only rely on the people, but also fight bravely with the people. I would like to point out that the SLORC junta changed the election result to Kyaikkasan-Nyaungbin conference because the ruling party, which won the 1990 election, did not dare to convene a parliament at Gandhi Hall. > > Although the Burmese Communist Party does not accept the 2008 constitution, it strongly opposes the legitimacy of a democratically elected government by a non-elected military party that threatens a coup d'état and coercion. At the same time, I would like to warn that any civilian government will be in exile under the 2008 constitution. > > The current situation is that the Tatmadaw initially said it would protect the 2008 base. When it was about to be abolished, the NLD became a defender. This time, the Tatmadaw is back in its place. What does this indicate? Chairman Thakin Ba Thein Tin said that the egg did not fall from the sky. I told Ne Win that it was man-made. The legitimacy is in the interest of the people as well. It should be noted that the abolition is in the interest of the people. > > What Min Aung Hlaing was doing was snorting. Is this the motto of the junta: "The Tatmadaw leads the national politics of the country"? This change is due to the fact that the United Nations, international dignitaries, and countries, as well as the National Sangha Patronage at home, do not accept this act. Because of opposition. > > There are lessons to be learned from the experience of the independence struggle and the experience of the Eight-Point People's Uprising, that only with the support and protection of the people could we resist the oppression of fascism and the revolt of corrupt governments. > > Coup threats by the military regime representing Min Aung Hlaing; Military force and bullying; The schemes of annulling the election results can only be countered by standing up to a politically active and ready-to-fight oppressed people of all races. In general, this law needs to be upheld in present-day Burma, which is in constant danger of a coup d'état by generations of military regimes. > > The people will surely enter the political high tide to overthrow the military dictatorship through a series of battles of various forms through the abolition of the 2008 constitution. > > If there is justice, there are many helpers. The public is the creator of history. > > Be alert! > > 31 January 2021 > > (1382, 4th day of the Blue Moon)

I created this community, named after the Pravda (Правда), the official newspaper of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, to elicit conversation about current world events, from a socialist perspective. Pravda is the Russian word for "Truth", and this community seeks to debate and discuss current news to find socialist truth from current events. The point of this community is to discuss current world events from a socialist perspective, whether or not the event itself inherently relates to socialism or not. Also, feel free to post vintage pictures of the Pravda if you want.

Update. It's no longer a ["coup attempt," it succeeded. ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Myanmar_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat) Aung San Suu Kyi and Win Myint have been removed from office and detained. The Tatmadaw, headed by Min Aung Hlaing, are now the head of Myanmar.

www.reddit.com

Pretty much now an argument between pro-Putin communists (Which sounds like a fucking oxymoron to me) and anti-Putin communists (which I thought was the fucking norm).

Communism101 The_Lobster_Emperor • 4 years ago • 87%

Sorry if this is more fit for a debate sub, so this is the first place I could think of to post this. So Twitter banned Mike Lindell. My thoughts towards Twitter banning right-wingers is that it's not equal to left-wingers and anti-capitalists being censored and assassinated. And that because they constantly advocate for "If a baker won't make you a cake go to a different baker or start your own bakery" and that their just the woman sobbing "I NEVER THOUGHT THE LEOPARDS WOULD EAT MY FACE" after voting for the Leopards Eating Faces Party. Twitter shouldn't exist, and socialism suppresses those who advocate for the bourgeoisie anyway. So I don't give a single shit if right-wingers are getting banned. What's your thoughts?

Communism101 The_Lobster_Emperor • 4 years ago • 90%

What are the best arguments against the existence of landlords, from an economic, social and Marxist standpoint?

Communism101 The_Lobster_Emperor • 4 years ago • 100%

Simple question, hopefully.

www.reddit.com

First, let me clarify. The concept of someone being a "race traitor" is inherently a fascist concept. It was used by the Nazis to call Germans who fought against the Nazis as traitors to the "Ayran race" and it is still used today by neo-Nazi groups and groups such as the Ku Klux Klan to call out white leftists as traitors to the "white race." Biological race does not exist. The genetic diversity between humans is far lower than the average genetic diversity of other mammals. The differences control arbitrary things like the shape of your eyes, the colour of your skin, and your resistance to tropical diseases. Biological race does not exist. Race is a social construct created for racists and fascists to justify their oppression. So when I hear leftists on GenZedong calling some asian guy an "honorary white" or "race traitor" (although the person who did that got called out and apologised/edited their comment) it frankly disgusts me. People do not owe a duty to their race. The idea that they do is literally a fascist concept. The minute people start accusing others of being "race traitors," they are spouting fascist bullshit. Because again, **people do not inherently owe a duty to their race.** r/GenZedong, despite me generally liking it, delves too close time and time again to fascist racial bullshit. One person is talking about the concept of a Hanjian as betraying "the Han State" which is is just Han chauvinism supported by a bunch of sinophiles. People are confusing fights for emancipation with chauvinist fascist bullshit. This is what happens when people entirely ignore the class character of this sort of shit in favour of race reductionist bullshit. When people are too concerned with crackers and not enough about the class conflict and its enforcement of systematic racism and imperialism, preferring instead to blame it on "crackers" as though the average Joe the Miner is supporting the War on Terror because it's part of his evil plan to destroy Muslims and not because he's been fed bullshit by racist right-wing media. This isn't to say racism and imperialism aren't issues, but that they are part of the greater class conflict. Is Barack Obama an "Uncle Tom" or a "Race Traitor?" No, because he doesn't owe servitude to his "race." He serves his class, the bourgeoisie. Candace Owens isn't a race traitor, because she doesn't owe servitude to her race, she serves as a token black lady who's job is to give right-wing outlets like TPUSA and Pragur U credibility. Race reductionism is fucking stupid. The concept of people "betraying their race" is fucking stupid. It's an argument made by skinheads for skinheads and the fact people are so caught up in their rabid anti-cracker campaigning to realise they're gobbling down literal fascist arguments is fucking astounding to me.

Communism101 The_Lobster_Emperor • 4 years ago • 85%

I have some genuine questions about the Maki (Communist Party of Israel), what is their line, and their views on the events surrounding the Levant?

Communism101 The_Lobster_Emperor • 4 years ago • 100%

So I was looking up nazbols because I've been curious about them. Wikipedia (everyone's favourite website) considers the movement to a brand of fascism. So of course whilst searching "nazbol" I saw the National Bolshevik Party's official page. Clicked on it, when to "questions" and then "concerns" and proceded to laugh my arse off after reading this: > **Aren’t you just Commie-Nazis?** > > The National Bolshevik Party is not a “commie-nazi” organization. We reject both communism and nazism. So they don't think they're "commie-nazis," and they also make it 100% clear repeatedly that "NO, WE'RE NOT RELATED TO LENIN, OR THE BOLSHEVIKS OR THE BOLSHEVIK REVOLUTIONS!" So what *are* they related to? It's clear they don't think they're communists, but the Wikipedia page says early on they claimed to adhere to Marxism. The Serbian Radical Party (apparently another nazbol shitfest) apparently support a socialised economy and glorification of their communist past, as well as anti-imperialism (which, granted, is not actually inherently a left-wing stance) and support for left-wing leaders like Maduro and Gaddaffi. So I ask: **What the fuck is a nazbol?** What is National Bolshevism? Why does a party that claims to have nothing to do with the Bolsheviks called the "National Bolshevik Party," why is their logo a hammer and sickle if they're not communists, what is their history, what is the best analysis of them, are they scum or misunderstood comrades (I fucking doubt it)? Why are they such a fucking meme?

This chauvinistic take is many from an exchange where I stated this quote on Mao; > In the final analysis, national struggle is a matter of class struggle. Among the whites in the United States it is only the reactionary ruling circles who oppress the black people. They can in no way represent the workers, farmers, revolutionary intellectuals and other enlightened persons who compromise the overwhelming majority of the white people. "Statement Supporting the American Negroes in Their Just Struggle Against Racial Discrimination by US Imperialism" (8th of August, 1963) - Page 21 of Quotations from Chairman Mao Tse-tung From [this image.](https://www.reddit.com/r/GenZedong/comments/kci0og/as_much_as_it_fucking_sucks_its_your_duty_as_a/) Going back through their post history shows a similar line of fucking nonsense such as: > Also, again, I’m the Korean communist son of a North Korean Marxist refugee, and have far more comprehensive understanding of Marxism than any white person, period. > > The fact that you keep calling Lenin and Marx “white”, shows you simply don’t understand what whiteness is. You’re a fucking child and an enemy of the revolution, not a revolutionary, shut the fuck up junior ~~For the record, I don't think their understanding of Marxism is "more comprehensive and understanding than any white person" given that their definition of socialism is:~~ > Socialism is when the workers’ party that runs the government does stuff, for the people Judging by the fact they then started calling other people revisionist, and their continued ramblings [on the same post,](https://www.reddit.com/r/GenZedong/comments/kbhfmd/socialism_is_not_coops/) I'd say they seem to genuinely believe it. Of course, legitimately believing a fucking meme by saying "Socialism is when the government does stuff" means I'd say they have about as comprehensive an understanding of Marxism as Turning Point USA. Of course, back to their image, what utter chauvinistic horseshit. And I think the word chauvinistic is apt because it takes a certain level of arrogance to, after my post which ends with: > but that I think in my opinion it is rather arrogant and wrong to dismiss everyone in imperialist nations as petit-bourgeoisie. To then sideline that by asking me to prove that white people don't benefit from imperialism (something never said) before arrogantly going off onto different nonsensical arguments. As it turns out, I was right, it is arrogant and takes a certain level of arrogance for someone to dismiss everyone in imperialist nations as petit-bourgeoisie. Which clearly must have been taken as a challenge because this chauvinist gladly came along to prove me right.

Cool America Facts The_Lobster_Emperor • 4 years ago • 100%

Appears the creator is an anarchist and is going full authoritarianism and banning "tankies" and people active on r/GenZedong, so I just wanted to remind everyone that this sub (community, or whatever they're called on Lemmy) isn't in anyway affiliated with the mod team from Reddit and from the start I intended to keep it that way, in fact, the only reason I know about the ban wave is because I just got hit by it. The reason I made this "thing" is because I disagreed with some of their policies and had a suspicion that they would soon start purging MLs like myself. Not much else to add. Enjoy your cool America maymays here on Lemmygrad.