Fair, that is the part that I know the least about but at a glance… it does look like you are correct. I will edit my comment above to reflect.

Even if taken literally, the second part would still then be my “sincere view” and therefore “the correct opinion”, no?

apparently there is some env var PUBLIC_ALLOW_TOXIC_MODE that disables the entire list. From https://github.com/db0/tesseract/blob/c6767607da9f08033bbc38c2c3e38975be0eef2e/src/lib/policies/system.ts#L89

export async function updateSystemFilterPolicy() {
    SYSTEM_POLICY.set(BLANK_SYSTEM_FILTER_POLICY)
    return
    if (SBDisabled && get(userSettings).enableToxicMode) {
        SYSTEM_POLICY.set(BLANK_SYSTEM_FILTER_POLICY)
        return
    }

dunno if it actually works as intended tho. Also the main repo got deleted apparently lmao

If I were to give my own definition of what constitutes a tankie, I’d say it’s anyone who defends existing socialist states, past or present. Those socialist states are generally understood to be the USSR, PRC, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, DPRK, GDR, etc. The defense tankies give is not in accepting both bourgeois historiography as accurate but justified, but instead in directly combatting bourgeois historiography. Tankie is also a pejorative for these people, used to convey the strawman of the person that believes the lies of the Red Scare but believes them to be justified.

In that case, I am definitely a tankie. I spend a good deal of time talking about socialism both past and present, and arguing for how we can expand that movement and carry it to the future. I am definitely a defender of socialist states, I just don’t believe the common allegations such as “100 million were killed by communism” are at all accurate. I don’t think you’ll find someone who believes the 100 million number but also thinks it’s good and justified.

It’s also useful to understand it in this manner because it explains why even anarchists and liberals are called “tankie.” The throughline about defending existing socialism is the central identifier of a tankie, and the use of tankie to dismiss those who defend socialism as it exists in the real world is also covered by this understanding.

There have been a few fiascos about it. It isn’t exactly unknown, but it isn’t exactly advertised either.

I was curious to see if you were simply so passionate about the issue you were accidentally commenting in bad faith because you lost your cool or if that’s just something you double down on because you’re a troll.

Given it’s the latter, enjoy the block!

Just “re-education”

Deafboy dramatically and intentionally misrepresented the point, but all states are monopolies on violence, all are “authoritarian.” The excesses committed in socialist States are genuine excesses of socialism.

That being said, “concentration camps” is a bit disingenuous. No socialist state has had industrialized mass murder like the Nazis, UK, US, etc. Most deaths in prisons in the Soviet Union, for example, happened due to starvation during World War II, after the Nazis took Ukraine, the USSR’s breadbasket.

Contributing famine to socialism is even more disingenuous. In all instances of famine in socialist countries, these have been in countries historically food insecure with common famine, and the socialists were the ones to end the cycle of famine. Socialism did not cause the famines, weather disaster and underdeveloped agricultural forces did. Mismanagement often played a part, but not in a way intrinsic to socialism nor in a manner that would have made capitalism preferable.

As for cultural purges, this is more vague. The cultural revolution in China, for example, is recognized as a mistake by the CPC. This is all I can really think of, though, when it comes to “cultural purges.”

As established in the other thread here, state-wide communism can only be achieved by the violent means.

What needs to follow is for the people to willingly forget some of what they know, uninvent the market, money, and give up every possesion that’s of any significant value. That is not going to happen without violence either.

And to keep the society in this state, you need an aparatus that will constantly keep them in fear, or ar least apply some kind of double-think. A dictatorship is the only way to do that.

This is how the soviet style communism has been brought to my city:

Communism is inherently authoritarian.

And to that I say: Authoritarians of the world, gurgle my balls!

they absolutely pale in comparison to the atrocities committed for capitalism and colonialism

Colonialism is colonialism. No matter the color.

I won’t weep for landlords, capitalists

Then weep for the workers who were denied education because they refused Leninism. Weep for those who has been sent to work in the uranium mines. Weep for those persecuted for their faith. Weep for those who has been put to a fucking jail for watching a Knight Rider on TV.

working classes after successfully gaining political power

What you call a working class has never achieved political power. Only the chosen faithful families could ever get anywhere near the office desk, not even mentioning a political function. Without pledging you allegiance to a one of the worst dictators who ever lived, you were not even considered.

The sheer effectiveness of socialism in uplifting the people

Yes. The toilet paper outages and bribes for the butcher so you can skip the line were certainly very uplifting.

it’s unfortunate that this can only be successfully established via revolutionary and therefore violent means

And here we are. You’re openly advocating for death and destruction to follow some kind of a fairy-tale. You’re no better than an american soldiers leveling a primary school to the ground, or a russian soldier executing civilians in Butcha.

daily brutalization of the working classes

Open your fucking eyes. You can no longer see the real wold for the veil of victimization you have put upon yourself. There is no class.

And most importantly, stop scheming about some great revolution and CREATE the means of production!

I won’t weap for landlords, capitalists, and fascists that were killed or imprisoned for their crimes against the working classes

Well, yeah. Those are among the groups you said you explicitly want to mass murder. Why would you weep for them?

Which wars have the NYT’s been against, again? Which policy of W’s were they against again?

I agree with Cowbees definition, but the NYT’s isn’t left wing BY YOUR OWN DEFINITION of left wing.

New York Times is precisely as left wing as liberalism. You’ve been raised to implicitly think of liberalism as the “normal amount of left”, and that is not accurate. That’s my assumption at any rate, because I was raised that way and carried around a similar misconception.

Both are right-wing. Both uphold capitalism, imperialism, and Zionist genocide. Leftism begins at socialism.