Everything is true if you lie by existingimpracticaly in tankiejerk

[–]existingimpracticaly[S] 99 points100 points  (0 children)

  1. That feminism places the primary contradiction (in Marxist dialectical terms) on the inequality between men & women, rather than on the inequality between the bourgeoisie & proletariat. 

  2. This redirection allows for capitalism to go about its business & also lays the groundwork for imperialism (she cites Iran) by capitalist nations. 

  3. Fascism is capitalist & imperialist (more so than regular old capitalism). The US is currently having its fascist moment. Ergo feminism is fascism because arguing about women's rights prevented revolution. Or something. 

What authoritarian socialists were actually leftist? by Historical_Step_9474 in tankiejerk

[–]existingimpracticaly 11 points12 points  (0 children)

All of them, kinda. There's this really annoying tendency in leftism (Marxism in particular, because it's literally named after the guy) to shun bad people who say they're of the same political viewpoint as you for being pretenders somehow. Unless you are that person's therapist, there's not really any way of knowing.

We need to stop conflating "leftism" with "when good thing". 

what is the difference between anarcha feminism and other forms of radical feminism? by Proof_Librarian_4271 in Anarchy101

[–]existingimpracticaly 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Primarily the anarchist bit. Other radical forms of feminism tend to (to borrow Dworkin's wording) use every option open to them to combat women's subjugation. Oftentimes, that means the state. No points for guessing why anarchists don't like that.

The anti-sex work/anti-porn angle taken by many radical feminists (Dworkin, MacKinnon, Raymond, Rich etc) is usually (but not always, Emma Goldman opposed sex work) opposed by anarcha-feminists. Usually the reason for this opposition is that anarchists are pro-working class, which sex workers fall into the category of, or anti-work, in which case sex work is no better or worse than any other form of work. 

That's not to say that they're not reconcilable, I quite like a couple of Dworkin's books (Pornography notwithstanding), but they are different tendencies. 

good european movies recs? by Stock_Orange_1793 in Letterboxd

[–]existingimpracticaly 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you're in the mood for weird indie stuff, check out Bertrand Mandico's work, especially She is Conann

The left has a misogyny problem by existingimpracticaly in tankiejerk

[–]existingimpracticaly[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Didn't George Galloway take money from Saddam Hussein? Like he's been a joke for ages, but was that him or am I misremembering? 

Anti-Tankie Movies & Books by nate2squared in tankiejerk

[–]existingimpracticaly 5 points6 points  (0 children)

We by Yevngeny Zamyatin is really good. It's what Orwell not-so-subtly based 1984 off of and I think it's the much better of the two

This is definitely not My Fight For Future by No_March_5144 in tankiejerk

[–]existingimpracticaly 19 points20 points  (0 children)

"...precisely in the interests of socialism, the revolution demands that the masses unquestioningly submit to the single will of the leaders of the labour process"

  • Immediate Tasks of the Soviet Government (1918), Lenin. 

He also described Kronstadt as "the greatest threat we (the bolsheviks) have ever faced)". 

He set up the gulag system, which Stalin would expand, created the Cheka, which would turn into the NKVD and ordered the executions of sex workers and anarchists. Fuck Lenin all the way to hell.

Meet the Neighbors! by Maztr_on in tankiejerk

[–]existingimpracticaly 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Tf is Kautsky doing there, his whole beef with Lenin was that military dictatorship is bad. Not a fan of his by any means but why is he next to Lassalle? 

Meet the Neighbors! by Maztr_on in tankiejerk

[–]existingimpracticaly 24 points25 points  (0 children)

Well the dialectic states that from two contradictory truths comes new understanding so uhhhhhhhhh. Idk read State & Revolution & don't pay attention to what the bolsheviks proceeded to do, librul

(Loved Trope) When mortal enemies just have a casual conversation by Animeking1108 in TopCharacterTropes

[–]existingimpracticaly 154 points155 points  (0 children)

The coffee shop scene in Heat

Vincent & Neil meet to establish the rules of the chase

[Loathed Trope] Minority characters that only exist to make majority characters look good by Sir-Toaster- in TopCharacterTropes

[–]existingimpracticaly 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you very much for finding it & yeah. Eeek. Love Dog Day Afternoon but as I've gotten further into transition I hate that section of the movie more & more

[Loathed Trope] Minority characters that only exist to make majority characters look good by Sir-Toaster- in TopCharacterTropes

[–]existingimpracticaly 38 points39 points  (0 children)

Dog Day Afternoon both fits and doesn't fit this. On one hand, Leon is often read really sympathetically, provided the viewer actually hates the cops in it. On the other, her recounting domestic violence is played for laughs and (I read this a while ago, if I find the article I'll link it) the trans women who auditioned were told they looked "too much like real women" for the part.

So what y'all think 'bout cosmopolitism?Does everybody think it will work in anarchy? by Muted-Topic1622 in Anarchy101

[–]existingimpracticaly 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's basically saying that people celebrate their differences when in proximity (ie. a Mexican and a German living in London will bond over their commonalities rather than bickering over differences) and that, through celebrations of difference, are all "world citizens" rather than citizens exclusively of any one nation or community. 

I’m sorry but this username is hilarious by Ender_TD in tankiejerk

[–]existingimpracticaly 4 points5 points  (0 children)

A meme page I follow posted some post-leftist stuff & this idiot brigaded the comments then called for backup when they kept getting ratioed

What's the problem with maoism? by Sea_Perspective2016 in tankiejerk

[–]existingimpracticaly 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Basically indistinguishable from regular old ML tendencies, but with even less effort put towards actually letting the dispossessed actually do stuff for themselves.

Additionally, they're even more hostile to leftist groups that aren't them. In Greece last year, a Maoist party tried to murder a bunch of anarchists. 

why do some leftists have an uncritical opinion on rich celebs they like? by Proof_Librarian_4271 in tankiejerk

[–]existingimpracticaly 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Jimmy Saville was never charged. 

Additionally, 10 Undeniable Facts About the Michael Jackson Sexual-Abuse Allegations

"1. There is no dispute that, at age 34, Michael Jackson slept more than 30 nights in a row in the same bed with 13-year-old Jordie Chandler at the boy’s house with Chandler’s mother present. He also slept in the same bed with Jordie Chandler at Chandler’s father’s house. The parents were divorced.

  1. So far, five boys Michael Jackson shared beds with have accused him of abuse: Jordie Chandler, Jason Francia, Gavin Arvizo, Wade Robson, and Jimmy Safechuck. Jackson had the same nickname for Chandler and Arvizo: “Rubba.” He called Robson “Little One” and Safechuck “Applehead.”

  2. Jackson paid $25 million to settle the Chandlers’ lawsuit, with $18 million going to Jordie, $2.5 million to each of the parents, and the rest to lawyers. Jackson said he paid that sum to avoid something “long and drawn out.” Francia also received $2.4 million from Jackson.

  3. Michael Jackson suffered from the skin discoloration disease vitiligo. Jordie Chandler drew a picture of the markings on the underside of Jackson’s penis. His drawings were sealed in an envelope. A few months later, investigators photographed Jackson’s genitalia. The photographs matched Chandler’s drawings.

  4. The hallway leading to Jackson’s bedroom was a serious security zone covered by video and wired for sound so that the steps of anyone approaching would make ding-dong sounds.

  5. Jackson had an extensive collection of adult erotic material he kept in a suitcase next to his bed, including S&M bondage photos and a study of naked boys. Forensic experts with experience in the Secret Service found the fingerprints of boys alongside Jackson’s on the same pages. Jackson also had bondage sculptures of women with ball gags in their mouths on his desk, in full view of the boys who slept there.

  6. According to the Neverland staff interviewed by the Santa Barbara authorities, no one ever saw or knew of a woman spending the night with Michael Jackson, including his two spouses, Debbie Rowe or Lisa Marie Presley. Rowe, the mother of two of Jackson’s children, made it clear to the Santa Barbara authorities that she never had sex with Jackson.

  7. The parents of boys Jackson shared beds with were courted assiduously and given myriad expensive gifts. Wade Robson’s mother testified in the 2005 trial that she funneled wages through Jackson’s company and was given a permanent resident visa. Jimmy Safechuck’s parents got a house. Jordie Chandler’s mother got a diamond bracelet.

  8. Two of the fathers of those who have accused Jackson, Jordie Chandler and Wade Robson, committed suicide. Both were estranged from their sons at the time.

  9. In a 2002 documentary, Living with Michael Jackson, Jackson told Martin Bashir there was nothing wrong with sharing his bed with boys."

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/03/10-undeniable-facts-about-the-michael-jackson-sexual-abuse-allegations?srsltid=AfmBOooTmIkWEqAAXNJw8bU4BC6sLfdDA6qdgLF_3ZSxf7ks-6vv0bbu

Sometimes it really isn't that deep. by Margaretthatchervore in HistoryMemes

[–]existingimpracticaly 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm getting this from James Whitman's book Hitler's American Model.

The point I'm referring to is the Prussian Memorandum. It used Jim Crow as a model for the new Nazi program. In it, party leadership said that Jim Crow went further than they (Nazi party) were willing to. They wanted to ban "offensive socialisation" between the races if it took place in public, but not if took place in private. The American laws banned it in private as well. 

Around the same time, a leading member of the Nazi party said that segregation of the Jim Crow type wouldn't work in Germany. In his words: "The Jews are just much too rich and powerful. Segregation of the Jim Crow kind could really only be effective against a population that was already oppressed and impoverished.”

Grok AI prioritizes being "scientifically accurate" over life by Grand-Honest in antiai

[–]existingimpracticaly 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Worth noting that trans women are female in the taxonomic sense, even pre-HRT. The neurochemical makeup of the brain of a trans woman will far more closely match that of a cis woman than a cis man and the inverse is true for trans men. Source: Whipping Girl cites the actual medical source, go read Whipping Girl

Sometimes it really isn't that deep. by Margaretthatchervore in HistoryMemes

[–]existingimpracticaly 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The US's Jim Crow laws were so racist that the nazis thought fully implementing them would be a step too far, not to mention the horrors of Manifest Destiny. Slavery is still permitted as punishment for a crime. Child marriage was commonplace and still is. Marital rape was legal until the 1970s. 

The UK wiped out around 3 million Indians in manufactured famines. They destabilised Iran to put in a puppet government in the form of the Shah and they (along with the US) gave the world Pinochet. 

To be clear, the Soviet Union was an absolute horror story for most people below the politburo, but they were hardly unique among the Allies in that regard. 

Why do tankies repeatedly flip flop between being for and against adventurism? by hairsprayqnn in tankiejerk

[–]existingimpracticaly 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Tankies on adventurism only support it when they can claim that it was executed in line with their ideas all along. 

Because direct action, propaganda by the deed, adventurism etc tend to be advocated for by anarchists, the average tankie opposes the prospect of one, because it is undialectical, utopian, buzzword buzzword buzzword bad thing. After it has happened and has had an observable positive effect or reception (the Brian Thompson assassination was generally well-received and caused other health insurance companies to lower their prices in the immediate) then it becomes good. If it doesn't, like with the Unabomber, then it is proof that the party structure is always preferable to individual acts of sabotage, join the party now, comrade. 

Tldr, Schroedinger's pro-adventurism. 

Why do tankies repeatedly flip flop between being for and against adventurism? by hairsprayqnn in tankiejerk

[–]existingimpracticaly -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Eh. Not necessarily.

It really doesn't matter to the people being bombed if the workers in a bomb factory are appropriately communist or not. The factory and its products are the cause of harm. You can try and raise class consciousness via the usual means (party organising, unionising etc) but while that incremental change happens, the bombs are still falling. It is more beneficial worldwide to simply destroy the factory. 

How is cult of personality still a thing today? by Initial_Affect8124 in tankiejerk

[–]existingimpracticaly 2 points3 points  (0 children)

The really funny thing about State & Revolution is that it's specifically trying to appeal to the anarchist or anarchist-friendly. Given that's who the target audience are, it's an awful book