760
Anti-Imperialism means recognizing capitalist states like Russia and China as such
(lemmy.dbzer0.com)
this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2026
760 points (91.2% liked)
Lefty Memes
7267 readers
749 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
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.
That's not what I was asserting, no.
The rest of your comment soapboxes on that straw man so I'll not respond to it.
Uh huh.
You're trying to deny labelling them a tankie now? That's just a blatant lie.
Another straw man. Try again.
How on God's green earth could that possibly be a strawman?
Hint:
Point out the comment where I said I didn't label them a tankie.
Is there a reason you're dancing around this instead of explaining what you meant by this? You're just trolling.
Jesus Christ, try to keep your racism in check.
Well then, I guess this is the conversational path you wanted, where we yell at each other over easily resolved misunderstandings because you decided to be a dick. Entirely your choice, not mine.
Yeah, hey, and what were those reasons you explained in the linked thread? Let's check:
Oh hey, what do you know? You're labelling them a tankie because they're too prone to using Marxist definitions!
Ah, more tankie logic; "Anti-Russian and Anti-North-Korean sentiment can only come from a place of racism."
Oh you surely started the douchey behavior. I definitely joined you in the mud, though.
Not all Marxist definitions are mental gymnastics to defend imperialists, no. Until today I thought none of them were, but I haven't read everything he wrote so you could be right about some of them.
Either way, you're still wrong to assert that I beleive Marxist Definitions = Tankie. Marx wasn't a tankie.
No, suggesting that I need a translator is what's racist.
Funny, that's not what I said. Unlike you, I'll explain the distinction, though you probably won't see it. I said that you accused this specific person of being a tankie based on their tendency to use Marxist definitions, not that you do the same to anyone who uses any Marxist terminology.
It's not racist to assert that people are always better at their native tongue than they are at second languages; that's just linguistics and how human brains work. I'll never be as good at my second languages as I am at English, for example. It's not racist against my race if I or someone else says that. See how that works?
But I get it, you need to grasp at straws to malign me at this point. Propagandists gotta propaganda.
And again, that logic does not follow, and so it is not what I believe; I accused that specific person of being a tankie because they are doing mental gymnastics, yes by using what you consider a Marxist definition of imperialism, to assert that Russia is not imperialist. I sincerely doubt Marx would've thought Russia in 2026 is not imperialist. In fact, I don't even think that person was using a Marxist definition of the term. From marxist.com:
Feel free to cite Marx's actual words on the topic if you want, as I found that harder to find.
Regardless, "opposing imperialist states" is not the definition of a non-imperialist state, as that person asserted. Nor is "invading for irredentism (and taking and profiting off of the invaded country's resources)."
It is incredibly racist to start accusing someone of being a foreigner any time there's a miscommunication. And to be clear, this miscommunication is entirely on you, having admitted that you refused to clarify on the basis of "I don't respect you." English is my first language, and I am a white American.
There is absolutely no grasping at straws here. Imagine someone went up to order coffee and the barista mixed up their order, and they immediately started accusing them of being a foreigner, demanding to know if they "needed a translator" to get the order right. That person would very clearly and obviously be a racist, just like you. Maybe you're just too used to dismissing accusations of racism as "tankie nonsense" to see it, but it doesn't stop being racist just because you add a political context.
And you decided to go all in on the distinction between "Using a Marxist definition" and "using a definition that may be Marxist but I'm not sure and also I assumed they were using it in bad faith?"
Let's be clear. That is the miscommunication you refused to clarify. That is what caused you to go full racist and accuse me of being an illiterate foreigner, because I didn't read your mind to discover this razor-thin distinction.
You could have simply said that you didn't think it was a Marxist definition. But you do all this fucking bullshit, for literally no point but to air your racism and your total disrespect for anyone who disagrees with you on literally any point, who you will label as "tankie."
Obviously, in addition to all this horrendously bad faith behavior, you're also wrong on the actual point. The definition you cited is in line with my previous description of the Marxist definition pertaining to resource extraction, especially on a global scale.
Absolutely not, no. Xenophobic maybe, but in the context of someone spreading propaganda for foreign governments like Russia, DPRK, and China do routinely, it's absolutely not racist to suspect someone shilling for those regimes might actually be from those countries. It'd be like accusing me of being an American because I dislike tankies. "Oh no, racism!"
No, the miscommunication rests on your inability to parse logic written in English and my refusal to hold your hand because you gave me tankie vibes, which by now you have confirmed to be a good suspicion.
No point in saying that at this stage. "I promise, dear internet stranger, I am not lying!"
"Your opnion is incorrect. Mine is correct."
Thanks for practicing your writing and helping me practice my reading? Not a very convincing argument so I suppose that was the only reason you wrote it.
There you go, fixed your metaphor.
Rude, yes. Racist? No.
You tankies exhaust non-tankies with your constant bad faith tactics and you get all pissy when you get rude responses back. Sorry I'm not sorry. Scurry back to tankie spaces if you don't want that kind of reaction, I guess.
You've got it backwards. If I say things critical of Russia/China/DPRK on Lemmy when lemmy.ml people are present, they run out of the woodwork to accuse me of being racist. Cue eye-roll.
Again you stretch the truth to fit a nice straw man to attack. I can't comprehend what I wrote for you, and I can only re-write it to clarify so many times before it becomes clear that you don't actually care or have the ability to understand what I was saying.
Literally never accused you of being "an illiterate foreigner." I accused you of English not being your first language OR you struggling with logic.
Again, DPRK/China/Russia/etc. are known to have divisions of internet trolls attempting to influence the West. That's what I suspect you of. That's not racist.
Lot of words to justify racist bullshit.
Goddamn, you are impossible to communicate with. I think I've finally figured it out though. You just don't like when things aren't framed in the way you like. Saying that I must be a foreigner because I lack reading comprehension (or mind reading, in this case) is the exact same thing as accusing me of being an illiterate foreigner. The only difference is that spelling it out explicitly makes you look worse than when you were couching the accusation coyly in your own words.
In the same way, you insist that you weren't accusing someone of being a tankie because they were too prone to using Marxist definitions, but because they used "definition gymnastics" which happens to look exactly like insisting on Marxist definitions. It's literally the exact same thing, but you just don't like the way I say it. But it's not that anything I said was remotely untrue.
This entire conversation is just you whining about me accurately describing the things you're doing. It's like you expect anything anyone says describing your actions to be constantly glazing you and fluffing you up, and if that part is missing then it's "lying."
What an incredible display of racism, bad faith, and narcissism.
Another straw man. Try again.
Honestly, at this point, it's whatever you want to tell yourself. We both know why you said I needed a translator. This it like the third or fourth completely meaningless distinction without a difference that you've hinted at without being willing to even say. I don't care what games you want to play to try to weasel out of being called on your racism.
I grew up in the South before I became a communist, I'm all too familiar with this kind of "polite" racism, with whatever plausible deniability you think you have. That you're a racist is not a question to me at all, it's just a fact. Obviously, you're never going to admit fault, because you're acting in bad faith. But yes, in fact, you did imply that I was an illiterate foreigner, and yes, in fact, doing that is racist. You can whine about "strawmen" and call me a tankie for calling you out all day long, and I guess its whatever you need to do to sleep at night, but I can see straight through your bullshit.