Tankies asked what they would ban if running a country.

3 years ago by goat to c/meanwhileongrad

Saledovil 58 points 3 years ago
  • The first two want to consolidate power first. Typical capitalist move, get to the top, then pull the ladder up behind you.
  • The third guy has a sensible idea.
  • The 'ban Liberalism' guy probably can't define Liberalism.
  • The 'ban factory farms' guy has a good idea.
  • The 'ban cars' crowd I sorta agree with. Cars should only be used in rural areas, where public transit is not viable.
  • The anti-Israel guy, wants to ban countries from solidarizing with Israel. An inherently pro-war take.
  • Historical Revisionism, I had to look up who Adrian Zenz is, and Zenz is critical of the Uyghur genocide. So yeah, Historical Revisionism just means 'anything I don't like' to this commenter.

Edit: Changed 'urban' to 'rural' as pointed out by @goat.

path: 0 4904748, hotness: undefined, score: 58, children: 15
fmstrat 14 points 3 years ago

Banning "all" factory farms is a terrible idea without suitable replacements. There's a reason starvation has decreased world-wide over the past 100 years. There was a really good article posted yesterday about the challenges here.

Agree with the animal part, though.

path: 0 4904748 4909846, hotness: undefined, score: 14, children: 3
HelixDab2 7 points 3 years ago

From the context, he appears to be referring strictly to factory farming of animals. From an environmental and ethical position, it's hard for me to argue against that. I eat meat, but I'm also aware of how awful conditions are on those farms, and just how far definitions of "ethical" are bent in order to define them as ethical. I think that we need to change culture so that people don't view meat as central to a diet anymore, or eating large quantities of meat as being symbolic of having 'made' it

I also think that we likely need some kind of nationalized (maybe even international?) rotation for all crops, because the system that we're using of heavy fertilization, etc. is depleting our soil badly, resulting in crops with less nutrition than we were getting just 50 years ago. We're already in the beginning stages of climate collapse, and monoculture is making that significantly worse.

path: 0 4904748 4909846 4910217, hotness: undefined, score: 7, children: 1
fmstrat 2 points 3 years ago path: 0 4904748 4909846 4910217 4930574, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 0
YeetPics 1 point 3 years ago

If we didn't use 60% of America's grain belt for growing cattle feed (which humans can't digest) we could easily feed ourselves many times over.

path: 0 4904748 4909846 4932177, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0
goat 5 points 3 years ago

The third guy has a sensible idea.

Yeah, though that's going to be insanely costly for the government. Best solution is offering a cheap, readily available public version and then the premium services.

The ‘ban factory farms’ guy has a good idea.

It is! But ironically, animals are and have always been treated the worst in communist states.

The ‘ban cars’ crowd I sorta agree with. Cars should only be used in urban areas, where public transit is not viable.

You mean rural?

path: 0 4904748 4904968, hotness: undefined, score: 5, children: 4
Tavarin 6 points 3 years ago

The point of banning private versions of essential services is to make it so wealthy people have to use the same public version as poor people.

If a private alternative exists that rich people can use instead, the people who have the most power in society, then they have little incentive to provide a good public version.

path: 0 4904748 4904968 4912738, hotness: undefined, score: 6, children: 0
Saledovil 3 points 3 years ago

You mean rural? Yes, rural. Thanks for pointing that out. Yeah, though that’s going to be insanely costly for the government. Best solution is offering a cheap, readily available public version and then the premium services. Well, services naturally cost money. But yes, allowing private services would also be good. I'm just worried that the public version falls too far behind in terms of quality provided. As in, politicians see that the private version is only a bit more expensive than the public one, and therefore slash funding for the public version, causing the public quality to decrease, after which the private provider see higher demand, and then increase prices.

path: 0 4904748 4904968 4905176, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 1
Estiar 3 points 3 years ago

I used to mix up Urban and Rural because Urban areas are where you grow herbs right?

path: 0 4904748 4904968 4905176 4911348, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 0
muhammad_the_pedo 1 point 3 years ago

Third thing will only work if your land is filled with natural resources. Tankies sure take that for granted or just completely ignorant and doesn't realize that communism is realistically only feasible only if your land has unlimited natural resources and slavery.

path: 0 4904748 4904968 4932116, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0
NoneOfUrBusiness -1 points 3 years ago

The anti-Israel guy, wants to ban countries from solidarizing with Israel. An inherently pro-war take.

How so? This is basically just BDS.

path: 0 4904748 4905977, hotness: undefined, score: -1, children: 1
Saledovil 6 points 3 years ago

The way they word it, it sounds like they want to do that permanently, or until Israel collapses, with no diplomancy. Obviously, if the actualy strategy is isolate them until they agree to reasonable demands, then that would be diplomatic, and render my point moot.

path: 0 4904748 4905977 4906255, hotness: undefined, score: 6, children: 0
jasory -1 points 3 years ago

"Third guy has a sensible idea"

Not really, if you don't charge for services at some point it's simply going to be exploited. This why even government services that don't turn a profit aren't free.

path: 0 4904748 4909526, hotness: undefined, score: -1, children: 3
flucksy_bango 7 points 3 years ago

The said charging at the point of service. It is being paid for, just not at the time you need it.

path: 0 4904748 4909526 4910730, hotness: undefined, score: 7, children: 1
jasory 1 point 3 years ago

Obviously it has to be paid for somehow. My comment was clearly referring to the fact that charging the user reduces frivolous usage. There can be an argument for providing a set small amount of services for free (at point of use) and then charging for everything above, but that's not what was proposed.

path: 0 4904748 4909526 4910730 4919640, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0
FooBarrington 1 point 3 years ago
path: 0 4904748 4909526 4909680, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0
Supermariofan67 42 points 3 years ago

Lmfao, this is exactly what conservatives think all socialists are. Tankies are such terrible optics for advancing the left

path: 0 4902232, hotness: undefined, score: 42, children: 1
Socsa 8 points 3 years ago

It's because a non trivial portion of them are legitimately Poe's law trolls and the tankies are completely blind to it.

path: 0 4902232 4909342, hotness: undefined, score: 8, children: 0
julianh 16 points 3 years ago

Lmao the two top answers are fucking poetry. Really says all that needs to be said.

path: 0 4901698, hotness: undefined, score: 16, children: 0
throws_lemy 15 points 3 years ago

They need this

path: 0 4901851, hotness: undefined, score: 15, children: 0
goat 14 points 3 years ago path: 0 4900850, hotness: undefined, score: 14, children: 5
odium 12 points 3 years ago

That's more the authoritarian part than the communist part. No authoritarian regime has good track records for the rights of the animal homo sapiens.

path: 0 4900850 4901613, hotness: undefined, score: 12, children: 4
yata 11 points 3 years ago

It is no coincidence that bans are the first thing that comes to mind for them when talking about their power fantasies. They aren't really even communist, they are just authoritarians. They would embrace fascism in a heartbeat if it meant they personally would gain a position of power.

path: 0 4900850 4901613 4905392, hotness: undefined, score: 11, children: 0
Scrof 0 points 3 years ago
path: 0 4900850 4901613 4902922, hotness: undefined, score: 0, children: 2
goat 3 points 3 years ago

thats what homo sapiens are, my guy

path: 0 4900850 4901613 4902922 4903125, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 0
odium 2 points 3 years ago

All those communist regimes were also authoritarian. All the non communist authoritarian regimes also were bad for human rights. The commonality is authoritarianism, not communism.

path: 0 4900850 4901613 4902922 4903118, hotness: undefined, score: 2, children: 0
FireTower 11 points 3 years ago

"I thought historical revision was more of a neutral thing... Grover Furr is considered a revisionist and we cite him"

He was so close.

path: 0 4905069, hotness: undefined, score: 11, children: 2
TanakaAsuka 3 points 3 years ago

You're (and some of the people in the post) are conflating the colloquial and actual definition of historical revisionism.

Colloquially it just means lying about history, but the real definition is just reinterpriting history in a way that challenged the orthodox view. A great example is the dark ages, which from studying non Latin texts, many authors argue that the lack of knowledge and learning associated with the dark ages is actually just a lack of source texts in Latin from western mainland Europe.

So as you can see the definition of revisionism in an historical context is value neutral, it would depend on who what and how things are being revised.

path: 0 4905069 4906966, hotness: undefined, score: 3, children: 0
Akasazh 1 point 3 years ago

That's the most bizarre one. He's obvioulsy trying to apply critical thinking, but then undemines it by referring to their canon.

path: 0 4905069 4931805, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0
Socsa 8 points 3 years ago

Gotta love the "we will ban calling the exchange of scarce goods and services via a monetary proxy capitalism" crowd. For the love of God, please read a book.

path: 0 4909387, hotness: undefined, score: 8, children: 0
kzhe 1 point 3 years ago

Some of these are jokes pretty obviously though, or is it just me?

path: 0 5023673, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 5
PugJesus 1 point 3 years ago

Just you. All of those are normal tankie positions.

path: 0 5023673 5027971, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0
goat 1 point 3 years ago

Where's the joke in "I want to kill people?"

path: 0 5023673 5023890, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 3
kzhe 1 point 3 years ago

I mean the first one (the one I assume you're referencing) sounds like sarcasm, maybe I'm misinterpreting it but that's the tone I hear when I read it. Maybe the joke is extending how much they hate capitalists to something they don't believe?

path: 0 5023673 5023890 5031433, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 2
goat 1 point 3 years ago

It's a typical act from extremists to say bigotted, hateful shit and then hide behind a shield of "it's just a joke bro"

path: 0 5023673 5023890 5031433 5031718, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 1
kzhe 1 point 3 years ago

Might be true, I might be misreading tone

path: 0 5023673 5023890 5031433 5031718 5033981, hotness: undefined, score: 1, children: 0
meanwhileongrad
meanwhileongrad

@sh.itjust.works

login for more options
2341
881
1002

"Oh, this is calamity! Calamity! Oh no, he's on the floor!"

Welcome to MoG!

Meanwhile On Grad

Documenting hate speech, conspiracy theories, apologia/revisionism, and general tankie behaviour across the fediverse. Memes are welcome!


What is a Tankie?

Alternatively, a detailed blog post about Tankies.

(caution of biased source)


Basic Rules:

Sh.itjust.works Instance rules apply! If you are from other instances, please be mindful of the rules. — Basically, don't be a dick.

Hate-Speech — You should be familiar with this one already; practically all instances have the same rules on hate speech.

Apologia — (Using the Modern terminology for Apologia) No Defending, Denying, Justifying, Bolstering, or Differentiating authoritarian acts or endeavours, whether it be a Pro-CCP viewpoint, Stalinism, Islamic Terrorism or any variation of Tankie Ideology.

Revisionism — No downplaying or denying atrocities past and present. Calling Tankies shills, foreign/federal agents, or bots also falls under this rule. Extremists exist. They are real. Do not call them shills or fake users, as it handwaves their extremism.

Off-topic Discussion — Do not discuss unrelated topics to the point of derailing the thread. Stay focused on the direct content of the post, rather than engaging in arguments that lack mutual agreement.

Brigading/Trolling — If you're here because this community was linked in another thread, please refrain from maliciously voting, commenting, or manipulating the post in any way. This includes alt accounts. All votes are public, and if you are found to be brigading, you will be banned. Good-faith and honest communication is an exception.

Tankies can explain their views, but may be criticised or challenged for them. Any minor infraction of the rules may result in a warning and possibly a temporary ban.

In most cases, you'll be warned if you're violating the instance and community rules. Continuing poor behaviour after being warned will result in a ban or removal of your comments. Depending on the content, the ban time may vary.


go to feed...