this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2023
19 points (88.0% liked)

The Democratic People's Republic of Tankiejerk

1122 readers
2 users here now

COMM HAS MOVED TO !tankiejerk@piefed.social

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
PugJesus@lemmy.world
PugJesus@lemmy.dbzer0.com
19
Fringe right and fringe left both make this conversation difficult (lemmy.myserv.one)
submitted 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) by OwenEverbinde@lemmy.myserv.one to c/tankiejerk@lemmy.world
30 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Image Transcription:

An 8-panel Phoebe Teaching Joey meme.

The first panel is Phoebe from Friends saying "Russia".

The second panel is Joey from the same show replying with "Russia".

The third panel is Phoebe saying "has invaded".

The fourth panel is Joey repeating back "has invaded".

The fifth panel is Phoebe saying "Ukraine".

The sixth panel is Joey repeating back "Ukraine".

The seventh panel is Phoebe saying the completed phrase "Russia has invaded Ukraine".

The final panel shows Joey proudly proclaiming "NATO just started a proxy war".

top 30 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Victim blaming at it's finest! Ukraine gets invaded, it must be their fault!

[–] TipRing@kbin.social 4 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Maybe Ukraine shouldn't have been dressed so provocatively.

[–] OneOrTheOtherDontAskMe@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Westerners don't get it. They didn't see citizens in Crimea and Donbas walking around in their "fuck me, Putin" shorts and their "imperialism now" borscht stained t-shirts.

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Thank you for the laugh, see you in hell. :)

[–] Astroturfed@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

They're nazis because the NATO helped them not be colonized and drained of resources by Russia. Not wanting to have your hospitals and schools bombed, makes you a nazi obviously.

[–] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think the Russian conception of Nazi is literally someone who threatens Russia. The rest of the world focuses on the totalitarian ideologies and anti semitism, Russia largely focuses on just that they were against Russia.

[–] DulyNoted@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

I think the Russian conception of Nazi is literally someone who threatens Russia.

Yep. Just like the US definition of socialist/communist/terrorist

[–] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I exclude Tankies from the far left. Because at its heart, the left is anti-authoritarian. Tankies lost the plot somewhere and decided that full authoritarianism was the way to go, regardless of the human suffering that lead to.

An authoritarian regime that claims to be communist is no closer to the communist ideal of a stateless utopia than a fully capitalistic state. If the capitalistic state is democratic with popular socialist programs, then it's actually closer to the communist ideal than an authoritarian state that merely claims communism. I'm using European democracies as my gold standard.

[–] D1G17AL@kbin.social 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I would love if the US adopted a Euro style social democracy. Shit would be so much better.

[–] DessertStorms@kbin.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Take it from a European - no it wont, we're like 2 steps behind you in the race to the bottom.
Don't aspire to have the polite facade over the dumpster fire like we do, aspire to abolish the system entirely.

[–] Someonelol@lemmy.ml -1 points 2 years ago

Which country? Europe has a pretty large spectrum of policies depending where you live. On average though I'd say your standards of living are still better than what the average American would enjoy.

[–] Badass_panda@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago

Once you're talking about a "dictatorship of the proletariat" you're not anti authoritarian... let's not "no true scotsman" communism, being anti authoritarian is something that can be true of communists and capitalists but isn't intrinsically true of either.

[–] HelixDab2@lemm.ee -1 points 2 years ago

Because at its heart, the left is anti-authoritarian.

Well, no. It's not. The left/right spectrum is mostly understood as an economic spectrum, with the right believing in individual ownership of capital, the means of production, and land (and, of course, personal property), with the left believing in collective ownership of capital, the means of production, real estate (and in fringe cases, no personal property). Collectivism doesn't necessarily mean anti-authoritarian; anarchists are just one flavor of collectivists.

Marxist theory states that authoritarian control is a necessary precondition to absolute communism, until everyone is enlightened enough (more or less; I'm greatly simplifying this, since his treatise is 500+ pages and dense as hell) to be able to fully self-govern in a communist utopia.

I tend to agree that a democratic society that has strong collectivist tendencies while preserving strong individual autonomy is more desirable than an authoritarian gov't. Personally, I tend towards anarchism, but my view of humanity has dimmed enough in the last decade that I no longer believe that it's a viable form or governance.

[–] Badass_panda@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

This is a NATO proxy war in that NATO, an organization created to provide European countries protection from Russia's territorial ambitions, is providing assistance to a European country to help protect them from Russia's territorial ambitions.

I can't get over the circular logic of thinking Russia is justified in its invasion of another country by the fact that the other country wanted to be better prepared to defend against Russia invading it.

"I need to beat up my neighbor for trying to take a self defense class, because if he takes the class I won't be able to beat him up."

Dude, it only comes up if you're trying to beat up your neighbor. just don't do that.

[–] pancake@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"Russia has invaded Ukraine" is a true statement. "Russia has invaded Ukraine therefore I should do/say/support ..." is false in general, a deceivingly simple deduction that is hiding a lot of complexity under the rug. For example, what do I want to achieve by doing that? Is it beneficial for the working class? Does anyone want me to do it at all costs to support imperialism? Am I using an appropriate framework for extending ethics reasoning to large organizations and groups of people? What actions are lawful? If no one has the power to enforce that a country will not take unlawful action against another, how is it reasonable of me to expect that the other will not defend itself by unlawful force, if that is de facto its only defense? Am I having a positive impact on the world by simply acting against every country that does something I consider unlawful? If I do so more to some countries than others, am I not acting in favor of some countries? Shouldn't I choose what countries I act in favor of? If I don't do it, who is choosing that for me?

[–] Gsus4@feddit.nl 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I don't know, I wouldn't like my country invaded by a nuclear power, my house bombed, my family kidnapped and murdered, my workplace destroyed, does anybody in the working class think that helps anyone?

[–] pancake@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

There are many hypothetical ways. For example, that might prevent further war in the future, or might be the continuation of an existing conflict. It might alter the balance of power in the world in a way that is eventually beneficial to working class struggle. Hell I can think of thousands of ways in which not starting a war would have been worse than starting it. The fact that you can simply stamp a meme, appeal to emotion and make a huge logic jump without a single word is perplexing.

[–] awwwyissss@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

Hope you stretched before those fuckin gymnastics

[–] luckyhunter@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Why not both? Russian invaded Ukraine and the US is using it as a proxy war.

[–] TheDoozer@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This seems like a win/win/win. We have a huge stockpile of weapons we built up almost explicitly to fight Russia (if need be), and now it gets to be used against them. And it doesn't cost any American lives, which would make it seem like we're exploiting another country to fight for us. But we're not, we're actually helping them repel an invader, so we get to be the good guys while getting everything we want! If we stopped sending weapons, Ukraine would be screwed. So everybody wins except the Russian!

It's rare in this world that a situation like this comes along, and we should be able to feel good about finally being the good guys.

[–] luckyhunter@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I'd like to opt out and take my portion of this expense as a income tax rebate please.

[–] Imotali@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Then I call your debt to me for my portion of the taxes I paid for the highways you drive on, the social security you'll claim when your older, and the 12 years of public education we paid for you and your children....

What? Don't want to pay that back? Then stfu and deal with it. Taxes are paid for the services rendered (education, medical expenses, highways, etc).

After you pay for the services that money isn't yours, it's the government's. You don't get to tell other people how to spend their money. You choose to live in society so you choose to accept the services and their costs. The government uses this income, which is their money, and spends it how they see fit.

Don't like it? Too fucking bad. I didn't think I would have to explain basic middle school economics to somebody who's almost definitely a fully grown adult today.

[–] luckyhunter@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

My roads are paid for by my fuel tax, my social security (which I'm sure will never come back to me) is payed by myself now to get back negative returns later in life, and I pay for my children's education. I'd love to opt out of social security actually, they can even keep what I've paid in to date. You've contributed nothing to me actually, and the government isn't someone else or a corporation spending profit, it's all of us.

[–] Imotali@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You're just proving more and more you don't understand tax theory and American economics.

[–] luckyhunter@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

What part is wrong? my fuel isn't taxed? I don't pay SS tax? I don't pay my kid's tuition? I'd love to know what phantom taxes I can stop paying.

[–] Imotali@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

You do realise that regardless of whether you pay tuition, public education taxes were still collected on the assumption your children would possibly go to public schools. Your taxes alone do not fund your SS. Your taxes alone do not fund the things you would have benefited or do benefit from in America.

That's why they're paid for with taxes. So you don't pay as much.

But I guess literal taxation theory 101, the fucking bare basics of tax theory, literally the simplest of the simplest concepts in economics was too difficult to conceptualise for you that you needed it stated plainly.

[–] luckyhunter@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

So to summarize, I'm forced to pay taxes on things I don't want, and wont use, so I don't pay as much.

And I don't know how you you think social security is funded, but as a business owner I fund mine 100% by my self, I'm forced to participate in a ponzi scheme with a negative rate of return under the threat of the full authority of every 3 letter federal agency.

[–] Imotali@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

"I'm forced to pay taxes on things I don't want" no

"And don't use" nope.

"So I don't pay as much" if you use them

Again you're fundamentally misunderstanding taxation. You're not paying taxes for those services (I mean, in a way you are but indirectly through cost of services) you pay for the benefits of living in society. You use public roads, you 100% cannot say you don't because that's near impossible in America. You use public roads, your utilities get sent through public infrastructure (even when provided by private corporations they utilise public infrastructure in 87.6% of cases), you 100% do use publicly funded services and benefit from taxation.

Anybody who honestly thinks they don't is fucking delusional.

So for these services and goods, you pay money to the government. Then the government uses THEIR MONEY (because it is NO LONGER YOUR MONEY) to pay for other things. Things you might not use, but it's not your fucking money. So you don't get to decide how they spend it. Because it is not your money.

Once paid, that is the government's money. Not yours. That's how capitalism fucking works. It's literal capitalism 101, I learned this in 5th, 7th, and again in 10th grade. Oh, right.... you didn't use public education..... guess you should ask the private school you sent your kids to for a refund.

Edit: A list of things you almost definitely use, even if only occasionally, that are funded by taxes

  • Weather Information
  • GPS
  • Roads
  • Sewage
  • Trash
  • Agricultural Subsidies
  • Medical Research
  • Museums and Archival Programs
  • Many Many More Things
[–] luckyhunter@lemmy.world -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

GOVERNMENT GETS THE MONEY FROM ME! GOVERNMENT IS ALL OF US! THAT'S THE WHOLE DAMN POINT.

Yes, I'm forced to pay taxes on things I don't use, that's just a fact. I don't understand why you'd waste energy trying to tell me otherwise since you are factually wrong.

[–] Imotali@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Except I'm not. The only way I'm wrong is if you misunderstand how taxation works. You only pay taxes because you use the services of society. You literally cannot say you don't, it is next to fucking impossible not to if you have access to the internet in America. You 100% live somewhere that I can guarantee you benefit from tax funded programs. Meaning you are using the services. Those services have a cost, you pay taxes to cover the cost, they use THEIR MONEY (it doesn't matter if they get it from you, it is THEIR money after you pay it.... that's literally how capitalism works).

Also govt is not all of us. We are NOT a democracy. We are a republic. The govt is made up of REPRESENTATIVES that WE elect to REPRESENT us.

I honestly am surprised you managed to graduate high school given this is information we learn in elementary school. If you struggle with literal 5th grade civics, I'd hate to see how you did in 10th grade economics.

Edit: it's funny tho that the taxation is theft crowd is often the same ones to defend capitalism. Without capitalism taxation wouldn't be necessary as you'd decommodify those publicly funded programs. Commodification is a symptom and function of capitalism.

Fundamentally speaking, arguing for the abolition of taxation means you're advocating for something that began with the Communists.