𐔌ׅ͡ 𓈒𓏲 ׁ 　 𓈒 ݁　cyrus ᣟ

These people, in the same breath, will defend the violence that capitalism enacts on the proletariat. They will defend the system that fundamentally undermines human lives under the guise of ‘fairness,’ of ‘paving your own way.’ People starve on the streets while the ultra wealthy wage wars for idealistic control, and yet there are still members of the working class who will go out of their way to say that capitalism isn’t inherently flawed.

At the end of the day, damaged property can be replaced. Things like cars, businesses, and homes can all be rebuilt. You know what can’t? A human life. Once someone has starved to death, once someone has been blown up or shot, you cannot bring them back.

But, also, you know what? Violence against the bourgeoisie hardly counts anyway. In my opinion, at least.

Violence against the most violent of all- is deserved. The bourgeoisie are violent in every single possible way and they care a lot more about their material possessions than they do about us.

i know stalenin is the popular soviet pairing around these parts, but may i propose a different pairing to you.

stalotov!

(stalin and molotov)

i have a few screenshots of things on my page to support this thesis, but also, their relationship in general just makes it make sense to me.

thank you for your time i hope this proposal finds you well!!! （＾∇＾）

— @stalotov

Oops I just saw this

Hey guys you know there are other ideologies that strive towards a fair society and wants to dismantle capitalism? I would suggest democratic socialism for a start

But the main thing is that I think even many other leftists seem to misunderstand our politics, not to mention liberals and conservatives

One particular issue is the issue of imperialism. I say this because I saw a communist on here talk about how tankies support Russia’s “imperialism” because we believe it’s not as bad as US imperialism. I have problems with that assumption and framing ofc, but I think much of the imperialism discourse comes from the fact that we are operating on different definitions

To most people, imperialism refers to the exertion of political or military or economic influence by any nation. This is the wikipedia definition, it is the mainstream definition

Marxist-Leninists of course use Lenin’s definition, which is entirely different. We may understand a country’s foreign policy as exploitative, aggressive, or generally problematic, but that does not necessarily equate to the Leninist definition of imperialism. If we claim it’s not imperialism without specifying that, it just sounds to others like we condone everything basically

I think us tankies have got to get better at clarifying our theory and our perspectives, because a lot of the hate comes from severe misunderstandings of what we’re talking about

Sometimes just out of curiosity I look up anti tankie tags on tumblr and 99% of the time the criticism is targeted at things that most of us don’t believe