710
Anti-Imperialism means recognizing capitalist states like Russia and China as such
(lemmy.dbzer0.com)
this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2026
710 points (91.1% liked)
Lefty Memes
7249 readers
468 users here now
An international (English speaking) socialist Lemmy community free of "ML" (read: Dengist) influence. This is a place for undogmatic shitposting and memes from a progressive, anti-capitalist and truly anti-imperialist perspective, regardless of specific ideology.
Serious posts, news, discussion and agitprop/stuff that's better fit for a poster than a meme go in c/Socialism.
If you are new to socialism, you can ask questions and find resources over on c/Socialism101.
Please don't forget to help keep this community clean by reporting rule violations, updooting good contributions and downdooting those of low quality!
Rules
0. Only post socialist memes
That refers to funny image macros and means that generally videos and screenshots are not allowed. Exceptions include explicitly humorous and short videos, as well as (social media) screenshots depicting a funny situation, joke, or joke picture relating to socialist movements, theory, societal issues, or political opponents. Examples would be the classic case of humorous Tumblr or Twitter posts/threads. (and no, agitprop text does not count as a meme. Please post agitprop here)
0.5 [Provisional Rule] Try to use alt text or image descriptions to allow for greater accessibility
(Please take a look at our wiki page for the guidelines on how to actually write alternative text!)
We encourage alternative text (from now referred to as "alt text") to be added to all posts/comments containing media, such as images, animated GIFs, videos, audio files, and custom emojis.
EDIT: For files you share in the comments, a simple summary should be enough if they’re too complex.
We are committed to social equity and to reducing barriers of entry, including (digital) communication and culture. It takes each of us only a few moments to make a whole world of content (more) accessible to a bunch of folks.
When alt text is absent, a reminder will be issued. If you don't add the missing alt text within 48 hours, the post will be removed. No hard feelings.
0.5.1 Style tip about abbreviations and short forms
When writing stuff like "lol" and "iirc", it's a good idea to try and replace those with their all caps counterpart
- ofc => OFC
- af = AF
- ok => OK
- lol => LOL
- bc => BC
- bs => BS
- iirc => IIRC
- cia => CIA
- nato => Nato (you don't spell it when talking, right?)
- usa => USA
- prc => PRC
- etc.
Why? Because otherwise (AFAIK), screen readers will try to read them out as actually words instead of spelling them
1. Socialist Unity in the form of mutual respect and good faith interactions is enforced here
Try to keep an open mind, other schools of thought may offer points of view and analyses you haven't considered yet. Also: This is not a place for the Idealism vs. Materialism or rather Anarchism vs. Marxism debate(s), for that please visit c/AnarchismVsMarxism.
2. Anti-Imperialism means recognizing capitalist states like Russia and China as such
That means condemning (their) imperialism, even if it is of the "anti-USA" flavor.
3. No liberalism, (right-wing) revisionism or reactionaries.
That includes so called: Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism, Dengism, Market Socialism, Patriotic Socialism, National Bolshevism, Anarcho-Capitalism etc. . Anti-Socialist people and content have no place here, as well as the variety of "Marxist"-"Leninists" (read: Dengists) (actual ML's are welcome as long as they agree to the rules and don't just copy paste/larp about stuff from a hundred years ago).
4. No Bigotry.
The only dangerous minority is the rich.
5. Don't demonize previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.
We must constructively learn from their mistakes, while acknowledging their achievements and recognizing when they have strayed away from socialist principles.
6. Don't irrationally idolize/glorify previous and current socialist experiments or (leading) individuals.
Notable achievements in all spheres of society were made by various socialist/people's/democratic republics around the world. Mistakes, however, were made as well: bureaucratic castes of parasitic elites - as well as reactionary cults of personality - were established, many things were mismanaged and prejudice and bigotry sometimes replaced internationalism and progressiveness.
- Absolutely no posts or comments meant to relativize(/apologize for), advocate, promote or defend:
- Racism
- Sexism
- Queerphobia
- Ableism
- Classism
- Sexual assault
- Genocide/ethnic cleansing or (mass) deportations
- Fascism
- (National) chauvinism
- Orientalism
- Colonialism or Imperialism (and their neo- counterparts)
- Zionism
- Religious fundamentalism of any kind
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I needed a good laugh.
Never heard the word "irredentism" before, looked it up. It's literally fascist logic. Do tankies seriously not realize that the logical endpoint of irredentism is a world made up exclusively of ethnostates?
If you actually read what the person was saying, they said:
Marxists tend to use a specific definition of imperialism, and that user's position is that while Russia does engage in irredentism (bad), like invading Ukraine, they do not fit the Marxist definition of imperialism (which is more concerned with resource extraction on a global scale). This Marxist definition goes back at least to Lenin, so it isn't something that they just made up (as they were accused of in the thread), but the common meaning today is different.
This is being misinterpreted or distorted here into, "Russia's invasion of Ukraine is fine because it's irredentism" which was very clearly not what they were saying. What they were saying is that irredentism is bad (including the war in Ukraine), but that it is a distinct thing from imperialism.
They're still doing apologia by playing with definitions to argue that not only is Russia not imperialist, but they're anti-imperialist. Stating that Russia's invasion of Ukraine is irredentist and not imperialist carries the assumption that Russia's officially stated reasons for invading Ukraine are truthful when they are clearly not. Russia wants Ukrainian territory not because it's populated by ethnic Russians, but because they want to exploit the natural resources contained therein. Irredentism is the justification for imperialism, they are not mutually exclusive.
It's inherently difficult and subjective to speculate about motivations, and doubly so when talking about a country with multiple groups with their own motivations. Of course, in any conflict, enemy countries will be assigned the worst motivations possible, which is why virtually every conflict draws comparisons to Nazis, and the idea that the enemy will just keep attacking forever if they are not defeated. This was said about Vietnam (Domino Theory) and Afghanistan ("if we don't fight them there, we'll be fighting them here"). Those examples show that motivations assigned to enemy countries are often inaccurate.
I don't think it should be considered "apologia" to express reasonable skepticism that the motivations of a rival country aren't what some people speculate. Especially when they're still assigning a negative motivation to said country, just a different negative motivation than the one you assign. That's kind of a ridiculous degree of purity testing, "It's not enough to condemn Russia, you have to agree with my exact assessment of their motivations, otherwise you're doing apologia by condemning them in the wrong way."
As they said, they condemn both Russia's invasion and irredentism in general, so my main point was to correct your misunderstanding, when you asked if "tankies" don't realize that irredentism leads to negative results.
If they're going with a niche definition rather than the common definitions everyone uses, they should have stated that to prevent the confusion and argument that it seeded, as I said further down in the argument.
I actually agree with you on that. However, "being too prone to using Marxist definitions and terminology" does not warrant labelling them as a "tankie" or "Russian propagandist."
It's this sort of thing that makes me see every accusation of "tankie" as a complete joke. If you can literally say, word for word, "I do not support the Russian invasion of Ukraine" and still get called a tankie and Russian propagandist, then those words have no meaning, aside from, "You disagreed with a liberal about literally anything."
Did their condemnation of Russia not give you a moment's pause before dismissing them as a Russian propagandist and misrepresenting their positions to others afterwards? It seems like you just recognized that they're not part of your political in-group so you ignore everything and jump straight to labelling them a fascist. Yes, they communicated in a way that's somewhat confusing, but you're much more at fault for jumping to those unwarranted accusations.
Even if we take the assertion that they are doing apologia for Russia as true; the accusation of ‘tankie’ is strange. As if people who identify as communist have never heard of the fall of the USSR.
Maybe it would make sense when defending China in some contemporary contexts, but Russia?
It all reminds me of how George Bush used the term terrorism. Anyone who thought we need a different approach to respond to 9/11 than GWB was ‘letting the terrorist win’. Now anyone who thinks we need to find a different approach other than throwing the military industrial complex at the war in Ukraine is a tankie.
Do these same people think the war in Iran would be better if China got involved. Of course not, that would be insane. But change China to US and Iran to Ukraine and all of a sudden they support it.
The point is to have more skepticism toward all militarism; that’s not to say militarism is never justified. But NATO was literally built to contain the USSR, it worked on some level, the USSR fell. Russia’s militarism toward Ukraine is completely unjustified, but their complaint about still being contained NATO is valid. They subjected their people to a ton of economic hardship in the 90s to appease the west. But we can’t disband or renegotiate NATO because too many people benefit from it staying how it is.
The answer to the Ukraine war was to bring Russia into the western block on more equal terms 30 years ago. Now the situation is fucked, it gets more dangerous to more people every day it goes on.
I completely agree. Throughout history people opposing war have almost always been accused of treason and supporting the other side. 20 years ago the term was "terrorist sympathizer," today it's "tankie" and when we're still at war 20 years from now it'll probably be something equally meaningless.
Social democrats tend to rally around the flag during wartime, going all the way back to the social democrats in Germany and Western Europe who supported WWI. The reason for that is that they contain their stances to what is acceptable to the powers that be, and during wartime the scope of what is a permissible opinion narrows considerably. If they were prepared to break from that, they wouldn't be social democrats. For this reason, careerist social democrats will never be able to have any kind of international solidarity, nor will they generally oppose war in practice, no matter how much they condemn it in the abstract.
The best case scenario in Ukraine is, and has been from day 1, whatever peace agreement can end the war quickly and uphold lasting peace, regardless of who ends up with what.
The recent interview with Jeremy Scahill and Ro Khanna comes to mind as a contemporary example.
How much rhetoric has flown around about Israel's right to defend itself?
In that context, Ro Khanna, one of the most sympathetic national politicians to the Palestinian cause immediately after being held up at gun point by Isreal cannot say the Palestinians also have the same right to defend themselves.
I have a lot of respect for as far as Ro has tried to push things, but come on man, humanity cannot keep playing these games. Something has to give.
It's more or less exactly the content of this post here. Literal Russian propaganda, I'm sure. Couldn't confirm 100% because I don't waste my precious time checking what Russia has to say about their invasion, but I'm sure the term/topic of "irredentism" comes up and never "invasion" or "genocide."
Irredentism is a negative word, nobody would use it in their own propaganda to describe their own actions. Furthermore, the user you were talking to clearly and explicitly condemned Russia's invasion of Ukraine:
You seem to have misunderstood what they were saying, and the idea that they're spouting "literal Russian propaganda" while explicitly condemning the invasion, and labelling it an invasion, is completely absurd.
I guess that's why you felt the need to pretend they didn't label it as an invasion. I do wish y'all would practice a slightly higher degree of intellectual honesty though.