I think it’s reasonable to want to have a space that’s free from people that defend authoritarian regimes. From my perspective, at least, 196 has always been a more anarchist-oriented space, and I think it makes sense to try to preserve that.
I’d also make the distinction that they are not banned from this forum, in the same way that libs are not banned from posting on their instance – but those that post there are generally met with hostility, and that preserves the character of their space. I don’t see why we shouldn’t do the same.
Not to mention that this sub is unapologetically pro LGBT while practically every authoritarian government (including particularly those that tankies support) has been anti LGBT. eg, China prohibits same sex marriage and adoption, while forcing trans people to get permission from their family to transition (spoiler alert: they ain’t progressive).
Democratic socialism with actual equality for all (which goes hand in hand with the root issue socialism is supposed to solve) makes sense and is reasonable. But that’s not what tankies support. They’re defined by support for authoritarian states that have nothing to do with equality except pretending that they care about it.
Or how LGBT relationships and “sissy-men” get censored out the wazzoo in popular Chinese Media and on social media.
Fun fact my mainland Chinese friends started saying “this humiliates China” without any other context on their social media because they weren’t even allowed to say they were lonely during lock downs due to censors.
Since June 2008, qualifying Cubans have been able to have free sex reassignment surgeries under Resolución 126 (“Resolution 126”).[79][80] Opinion polling suggested the move was unpopular among the Cuban public.[81]
As many scholars suggest, the Cuban Government treats trans rights and sex reassignment surgeries as a health issue. Cuba operates under the idea that healthcare is a right to all, allowing trans people access to public health care.
That’s great. Good for them. Personally, I’m a lot more amenable to supporting Cuba. While certainly still deeply imperfect, I see Cuba as largely the victim of American bullshit sanctions.
But the fact that Cuba is better doesn’t change the fact that tankies regularly support China specifically. If you support two things, with one being good and one being bad, you’re still supporting a bad thing. So I don’t think your comment justifies support for China.
Your distinction really has no meaning when there are places in China where people can be openly LGBTQ same as America with the US being more actively hostile to people in most places.
I’m fine with the use of the term authoritarian if it has actual meaning, but the way it’s used here it’s totally context less unless you just assume whoever is saying it is saying it as a stand in for “not a Western liberal democracy”.
A thing which actually cheapens a term which was meant primarily to refer to fascist dictatorships and feudal dictatorships.
Dude. America prohibited same-sex marriage until 2015. And it was not Obama or Congress who legalized gay marriage in America, it was 9 unelected judges, by a 5-4 ruling by the way. And those same 9 unelected judges can take away Americans’ right to gay marriage any time they want to. There are lawsuits in place that are trending in that direction. As if America does not have a history of anti-gay discrimination…
So should we who practice anarchism not be allowed because we don’t believe in Demsoc rhetoric? To me, most proposed demsoc systems would still be inherently authoritarian, as all states are. Especially by so empowering a state by giving it ownership of property instead of collective and direct control by the population.
Am I not allowed because I think electoral politics are inherently anti-democratic and states serve primarily to create and protect the rich from the poor?
Your appeal to democratic socialism as if it were common sense is concerning, because it reflects a lack of will to even entertain other perspectives.
I think it’s reasonable to want to have a space that’s free from people that defend authoritarian regimes. From my perspective, at least, 196 has always been a more anarchist-oriented space, and I think it makes sense to try to preserve that.
I’d also make the distinction that they are not banned from this forum, in the same way that libs are not banned from posting on their instance – but those that post there are generally met with hostility, and that preserves the character of their space. I don’t see why we shouldn’t do the same.
Not to mention that this sub is unapologetically pro LGBT while practically every authoritarian government (including particularly those that tankies support) has been anti LGBT. eg, China prohibits same sex marriage and adoption, while forcing trans people to get permission from their family to transition (spoiler alert: they ain’t progressive).
Democratic socialism with actual equality for all (which goes hand in hand with the root issue socialism is supposed to solve) makes sense and is reasonable. But that’s not what tankies support. They’re defined by support for authoritarian states that have nothing to do with equality except pretending that they care about it.
Or how LGBT relationships and “sissy-men” get censored out the wazzoo in popular Chinese Media and on social media.
Fun fact my mainland Chinese friends started saying “this humiliates China” without any other context on their social media because they weren’t even allowed to say they were lonely during lock downs due to censors.
Someone’s missed the boat on Cuba’s new constitution.
Just a snippet, btw:
AES literally more based than the United States.
I’ll leave my emojis below:
spoiler
That’s great. Good for them. Personally, I’m a lot more amenable to supporting Cuba. While certainly still deeply imperfect, I see Cuba as largely the victim of American bullshit sanctions.
But the fact that Cuba is better doesn’t change the fact that tankies regularly support China specifically. If you support two things, with one being good and one being bad, you’re still supporting a bad thing. So I don’t think your comment justifies support for China.
Your distinction really has no meaning when there are places in China where people can be openly LGBTQ same as America with the US being more actively hostile to people in most places.
I’m fine with the use of the term authoritarian if it has actual meaning, but the way it’s used here it’s totally context less unless you just assume whoever is saying it is saying it as a stand in for “not a Western liberal democracy”.
A thing which actually cheapens a term which was meant primarily to refer to fascist dictatorships and feudal dictatorships.
Dude. America prohibited same-sex marriage until 2015. And it was not Obama or Congress who legalized gay marriage in America, it was 9 unelected judges, by a 5-4 ruling by the way. And those same 9 unelected judges can take away Americans’ right to gay marriage any time they want to. There are lawsuits in place that are trending in that direction. As if America does not have a history of anti-gay discrimination…
As opposed to the democratic political system in china I assume? I’m so fucking sick of American “leftists” simping for the boots they haven’t felt.
So should we who practice anarchism not be allowed because we don’t believe in Demsoc rhetoric? To me, most proposed demsoc systems would still be inherently authoritarian, as all states are. Especially by so empowering a state by giving it ownership of property instead of collective and direct control by the population.
Am I not allowed because I think electoral politics are inherently anti-democratic and states serve primarily to create and protect the rich from the poor?
Your appeal to democratic socialism as if it were common sense is concerning, because it reflects a lack of will to even entertain other perspectives.
YUP