Tankies are closer to gryopers than any other group. Im suspicious that they are, infact, the same people.
Trying to create division on the left.
hahaha, HaHaHa, HAHAHA! The origin story for both the original Hexbear and Lemmygrad community is being banned from reddit for “promoting political violence” for John Brown memes and saying Sherman’s march to the sea was good. Perfect case of projection.
More like 19th century liberals: “We have to find a proper compromise with the slavers. I hate all of these tankie
RussianUnion bots saying this is about slavery. We all know this is about states rights and freedom!”Karl Marx was alive during the civil war. We know what he and his fellow communists thought about it. In fact, some of his fellow Communists were Forty-Eighters: German Radicals who were exiled after the failed revolutions of 1848, many of whom fought in the civil war.
One of them was August Willich, an ardent Communist who thought Marx of all people was too conservative. A “Tankie” of his day.
The German Communists, like Willich, who fought in the American Civil War believed that the war against slavery, and in the side of the Union, was a Social Revolution against the reactionary landed gentry of the south.
Many Forty-Eighters settled in Southwest, Ohio. If you go to the rapidly gentrifying Cincinnati neighborhood of Over The Rhine, it’s called that because it was originally made up of forty-eighter German immigrants, who became active participants in the underground railroad, and helped set up social programs to educate freed slaves, and provide them with housing and such.
So the only person lacking critical thinking here is you OP. You’ve made up a guy in your head, to get mad at.
- I am not OP
- but a Black anarchist vanguard. (Since you are on lemmy, so you can’t see my «Politics» label)
- I sat down to review all your historical assertions without a single citation (meaning, I won’t cite back if you don’t)
- Are there Achtundvierziger today, or similar vanguard parties? @[email protected] maybe projecting the trends a sees from camp threadiverse comments & posts, but do we even have a contemporary vanguard party doing praxis?
- PSL legitimately doesn’t count, so if you bring them as an example, we have nothing further to discuss.
- Could Godric have your permission to cite you instances of what a sees is campist rhetorizing moving forward, so you hold them accountable? I believe all of us🧵 want to end campism. I in particularly need to see Dengism邓理论 gone forever. I am NOT asking permission for myself, or that of Dengist reprimands. But if you can work with Godric here to hold campist rhetorics from at the least
.mlwhen you see it. - I am on this instance exactly because I have given up on 习 bootlicks. So honestly don’t bring it up.
- Any additional questions?
Any additional questions?
Yeah, what in the ever living fuck are you talking about? This AI listicle-ass comment is genuinely illegible to me. I don’t understand what you’re trying to say
You’ve never seen an ordered list?
Want me to essay it?
A lot of people in the west think that Communists/Socialists are all leftwing, when there’s plenty of conservative traditionalist Communists.
What liberals think tankies think:
The Confederacy fought the US, so that means I like them
What tankies actually think:
The US is the Confederacy and that’s why I hate it
Johnson was able to reintegrate the planters into the political establishment. Unfortunately, John Wilkes Booth won.
This meme is just libel. There’s no way a tankie would support the Confederacy
Zionazis like godric are experts in libel
One would think so, but then we see the wild mental gymnastics going on to defend Russia. Pretty wild stuff!
I have seen more wild mental gymnastics from people defending the most prolific invader in the world (i.e. NATO) and claims that the rest of the world is bad for defending itself against it.
On that note, what do you think a state should do when the most prolific invader in the world starts amassing troops on its borders (or otherwise in position to attack, like with Iran), especially after said invader carries out a coup against a neighbouring state?
Don’t forget how they will also criticize western leftists and progressives endlessly for not being perfect and not even mention the right wing or non-western dictators. Bernie Sanders and AOC are apparently basically Nazis but Stalin was fiiiiine and who even cares about keeping fascists out of power.
I’ve said this in another comment, so likewise I’ll preface that I’m not from the US so I use liberal as in classical liberalism, but under a materialist interpretation that I’m prone to agree with, liberalism is a bourgeois conservative ideology, thus a liberal is inherently in favor of the status quo and capitalism. So really, it’s not about perfection, but rather an irreconcilable difference, or a contradiction, if you will. This is not to say that progressive liberals/social democrats can’t enact meaningful material reforms, but usually not without confounding factors.
As for excusing Stalin and dismissing the opposition from progressives against the real threat of the far right, can’t say I’m fond of the tribalism so common, but not exclusively, with MLs either.
Yes, OUTSIDE of the western bubble, the concept of right wing communists is pretty common. But as soon as westerners see it they’re like “Why are you Communist AND criticizing the progressive left?”
Welcome to your first encounter with right/conservative/traditionalist or Nationalist Communism.
This is not a difficult thing to grasp:
Communism/Socialism are ECONOMIC as well as political philosophies. So you can have ECONOMIC views that can have either left or right POLITICAL philosophies attached.
Understand?
Don’t forget how the idea of anti-authoritarianism is just reactionary and therefore can be hand-waved away. Dictatorships are cool as long as they align with the “correct” principles.
Obligatory fuck the USSR, rest in piss
Europe will never forgive the USSR for things like the 8-hour working day, women’s rights, fighting against colonialism (including Germany and Japan, but also including many other places, like Vietnam, Mozambique, Korea, etc.), massively improving life expectancy and education, guaranteed housing, and otherwise improving workers’ living conditions.
Lemmy Tankies seem to think: “The Confederates are bad but the USA isn’t perfect, so we should let the Confederacy win!”
ImperLialism?
Must fite Murican Imperilalalism!
It’s consistent. Their goal isn’t to uplift the West to leftist values, it’s to destroy the West for the sake of Chinese or Russian realpolitik or just plain anti-colonial revenge. A deeply Balkanized US that kills itself and diminishes its own power is one of the best things they could hope for.
A balkanized US is the best thing I could ask for too and I hate tankies
And all of the economic suffering for the lower classes which will happen if balkanization happens?
Economic suffering of the lower classes is already guaranteed, as it has been for many decades in the USA, worse and worse practically every year.
The federal government is incredibly expensive, and not worth the cost; we really would be okay without a world-dominating military that can attack anywhere in the world in 24 hours. Our state governments are 100% capable and there is no need of the redundancy.
The FED goliath all costs much more than the returns, and only makes the military and banker profiteers wealthy.
Economic suffering of the lower classes is already guaranteed, as it has been for many decades in the USA, worse and worse practically every year.
Literally not. There are ways to reduce suffering via a UBI + rent stabilization + jobs bills like we’ve done in the past, for instance. It happened during covid—we have the infrastructure. That alone could offset a shitton of unnecessary suffering while they figure out a new economic model. A UBI can be temporary or not if necessary. Point is—there are options. You just gave up is all. That’s a you problem. “Economic suffering of the lower classes is already guaranteed”
Even if there is suffering that is going to happen, balkanization is not the best option. It just takes some creative thinking by people.
Is not being balkanized by fascists right now‽
No because that’s not what Balkanization means. Balkanization is the process by which a country splits into various smaller countries, like what happened to the former Yugoslavia.
The US is increasingly dysfunctional, but it’s still in one piece
Then why did they rename the Gulf of Mexico and Lake Ontario‽
They’ve not been renamed. Trump proclaimed it from his ass and twelve people on earth with access to a popular driving app accepted it and changed the names on the said app.
Renaming bodies of water isn’t balkanization either…
Pales in comparison to the economic benefit to the global working class if US imperialism ends.
Still not good that workers will suffer, but US balkanization would be a good thing for humanity at large.
What state do you live in?
Why does that matter to the argument at hand?
deleted by creator
Every large country should be balkanized.
I’d say the opposite.
Countries should be deeply tied together, both internally and externally.
Isolation and little fiefdoms are what the right wing monsters want. Little kingdoms where accountability is optional.
They can be tied together voluntarily under a system that isn’t the autocratic nation state.
Look at the world today. The biggest countries are all the worst exporters of right-wing autocracy. So I think your analysis is very backwards.
The largest countries who all stand alone and refuse to truly tie themselves to the international community.
I think you’ve missed the point.
Germany is arguably the heart of the EU and also has arguably the most concerningly powerful far right wing in the EU.
Large nations can only maintain themselves through oppression. The dynamic of voluntary association with other nations is very different from that. Unity can be good or bad. It depends on the context.
Wait are we all meant to be pro-US?
I don’t get it.
Lemmy.ml users in particular will defend fucking ANYTHING done in opposition to The West. Like they love to support Russia against Ukraine.
Also any time you say NK is a dictatorship they come out of the basement to say how awesome it is.
I was gonna try to defend my comrades for not being that brain dead then I saw the only other Lemmy.ml guy on this thread actively proving your point lmao
Its okay if you still want to. I find that they have a point in their grievances or pointing out how we in the west often fail at living up to our own proposed values of democracy and equality. I do get why they feel so strongly that they push to take it all, but the all or nothing is often counter productive I feel. Particularly given how much work they need to do with the general public that is not ready for some topics.
I’m not entering this argument, but I can see how “my enemy’s enemy is my friend” may be a thought process there.
Yeah, in a vacuum, sounds like a solid idea. Russia isn’t that friend, though.
I think the argument is:
China bad because of their human rights record. Where as the west can judge them (being from the same culture and all) because the west has a perfect human rights record. What you disagree? \s
It’s super weird when Liberals forget about Iraq, Afghanistan, Indigenous Genocides, Racial Profiling and the war on terror, Gitmo, Palestine, and Slavery all at once.
“Oh but in the past China and Russia had famines”.
They don’t realize they’re effected by 100 years of conservative messaging.
That is the thought process being mocked, yes
I stopped replying to one of them when they denied the holodomor or the chinese famine.
Its quite disheartening that we can’t even agree on a common reality.
I’ve been called all sorts of names just for asking for real evidence instead of flimsy suggestive bullshit. It took SO much pressing to get anything at all on the Ukrainian Nazi line they love so much, and I got SO much hostility for it.
Propaganda will do that. I’ve never met a single communist who denied that there was a major famine in China. The problem is that liberals seem to think Mao invented famine, when in fact China was experiencing famines every 2 to 4 years for over a century by the time the communists came to power. They had a theory for how to address the cycle of famines and increase food surplus, and their theory failed. But liberals think that Mao deliberately killed millions of people because he was an evil dictator instead of acknowledging the reality that Mao was leader of a massive government and they all failed as an organization by producing the conditions for famine. The context is also lost that eventually the Chinese revolution did end the cycle of famines permanently, and they were trying to solve it without any help from Western agriculture because the West was too busy protecting the fascist dictator that was holed up in Taiwan who was actively mass murdering and imprisoning political dissidents.
The Holodomor is another one of those things propaganda skews and breaks our ability to agree to a shared reality on. I have never met a single communist that denies that there was a famine and that many people died. What they often cite, which liberals can’t reconcile, is that the famine affected many more populations than just the people who were supposedly targeted and that research into the incident shows that the crop yield was severely negatively impacted by weather and made worse by not just bad decision making but also bad decision making that was in part driven by punitive thinking. The famine happened, but propaganda would have us believe that the famine was unquestionably a deliberate attempt at ethnic cleansing or genocide, when the evidence seems to be far more in support of a natural famine made worse by poor management with an added dose of maliciousness that ultimately rolls up to bad management.
In contrast, you don’t seem to have any problem with most Westerners having never even heard of the famines that were in fact deliberately caused by the West and for which the only explanation is the active choice of making a colonized population suffer.
Do you have a link to tankies denying there was an unwanted famine?
Holodomor was an unwanted famine that was redurected (food taken from farmers). Later wider famines were made worse mostly by Lysenkoism. A con-job which effected Russia and China.
Yes Communism is compared to Nazi? That’s what’s ridiculous liberal/right propaganda.
What happened is much more forgivable (although still regrettable) than what say the millions killed by the East India companies through intentional famines under Capitalism (done for profit), or the hundreds of millions in war dead from Capitalism in the past 30 years.
That’s much more recent, but some redirected famine from the 1930s keeps coming up when talk of Socialism makes wealthy liberals a little too uncomfortable.
What is an “unwanted famine”? Nobody wanted a famine. Lysenko was wrong, and the government backed him because they didn’t know he was wrong. It was a mistake, not a deliberate strategem to harm people.
Seriously. Was Holodomor a deliberate genocide? This is the hill you’re going to die on? Yes, the famine affected a lot of people, but we all know which people were least affected and it wasn’t the Ukrainians who were trying to actually grow the food. Much like the Irish Famine was only a tragic genocide because the British overlords wouldn’t put up with reducing their own take. The blight was real, but the decimation was pure unjustified cruelty.
I’m a leftist, but I’m an honest one. We gain nothing by denying the past and refusing to learn from it. It does a disservice to us all to hide the fact that old ethnic and cultural violence behind a window dressing of systemic failure. Systemic bigotry is still bigotry.
The kazhaks lost more people per capita than Ukraine did. Major non-Ukrainian Russian populations centers suffered equally or very nearly as much as Ukraine did.
So you may think you’re an honest leftist, but you might not be. As an honest leftist myself, I recognize that the Soviet government made tragic decisions, many of them punitive, none of them directed at ethnic cleansing, because the Soviet Union did not have an analysis that included specific ethnicities being material to their political goals as ethnicities. They understood, documented, wrote about, discussed, debated, legislated, and enforced the exact opposite of ethnic cleansing constantly. Yes, Ukranian suffered a lot through the transition to collectivized agriculture, more than most. But that’s because the majority of Ukranian peasants were freeholders of land, whereas the majority of Russian peasants were serfs. As freeholders, they would lose their claim to their farms. Serfs would suffer no such loss. This was structural. Russian peasants weren’t targeted for collectivization because under the Tsar they were already collectivized, whereas Ukranian peasants had private ownership of the land they worked.
Collectivization was not ethnic cleansing, the famine was not ethnically targeted, and the punitive actions of the Soviet Union were not ethnically motivated by an ethnic strategy of ethnic supremacy.
That’s honesty. Honesty is doing the reading, doing the research, and not discarding all the evidence that contradicts the obviously contrived narrative. Yes there was a famine. Yes it killed more Ukranians in absolute numbers. Yes the Soviet leadership made deliberate decisions that were intended to punish people who were Ukranians. No it wasn’t because they were Ukranian, no it wasn’t because the Soviet leadership thought that ethnic cleansing would achieve their intended goals, no it’s not because the Soviet leadership decided to artificially starve all of those people out of malice or ethnic supremacy.
As a .ml user, I hereby denounce the states’ rights to own slaves for which this war was fought. The confederates were not fighting against “the west”, they were fighting for racism and bigotry.
However, I do offer critical support to Hasan Piker, and think Americans should take a long hard look at foreign policy which led to the 9/11 attack. It’s the worst it’s ever been now, giving taxpayer dollars to Israel for them to purchase American politicians and order them to bankroll and provide cover for ongoing genocide and destabilization of the region so that Israel can steal more land. Like owning slaves, rank imperialism and land theft is wrong, especially post-globalization.
I mean I kinda get it. The biggest obstacle to World Peace today is the US. So you could make the argument that anything that opposes US Hegemony gets us closer to world peace. Idk that I would go so far as to “support Russia” but I understand the logic.
Please don’t defend them. These kinds of arguments lack any kind of deeper thought or nuance. It’s literally just trolling and straw-men. Do not feed the trolls.
These kinds of arguments lack any kind of deeper thought or nuance.
I mean that’s what Zionists say about Pro Palestine group. That’s what Americans said about resistance groups in the middle east. That’s what Americans said about the Natives.
I just disagree with this entire philosophy. You should be able understand an argument you disagree with.
I didn’t say don’t understand them, I’m saying they’re literally not thinking that deeply about it. They want to get a rise out of you and someone showed them they can do that by opening with a straw-man like this. By deliberately misrepresenting what “Tankie” means they can completely disarm it and force you to defend a position they chose, which they know is indefensible. It’s pure rhetorical strategy, they don’t actually know or care what a Tankie thinks. They’re trying to make the word mean something it never has and never should mean. Is it possible someone on their side has done some work to rationalize their twisted interpretation. That rationalization is usually paper thin and almost no one on their side knows or cares about it besides its usefulness as a tactical fallback. They don’t believe any of this, its a rhetorical game and the point is their nihilistic disregard for consequences.
That sounds like a description of every troll. Tbh I keep hearing tankie thrown around, but I’ve never had the conversations people who complain about it have.
Tankie is a general term for someone who thinks there is a clear justification to use force or the threat of force to impose a socialist system on a state. The term originates with people who supported the USSR “Sending in the tanks” to annex other countries and crush dissent from people in their sphere. They are what people mean when they “If you go far enough left, you get your guns back.” These days they tend to be a tiny minority within the rather small minority of actual leftists. They do exist, and some of them are pretty out there, but not the way the .ml crowd tends to characterize them. They’re terrified of them, because in their heads the most terrifying thing in the world is a leftist that is willing to fight back, and they don’t recognize anything that doesn’t kill someone as “fighting.”
It’s literally just trolling and straw-men
And sealioning, can’t forget that.
Blocking them and moving on is usually the best option. They’ll ruin your day given the chance.
Oh and if they violate the rules of where they’re posting, report them before blocking.
I think this explanation makes the meme even more confusing 😭
The Confederacy was fighting against the United States. Under tankie logic, that must mean that they’re virtuous and attempting to build communism. In reality, they were fighting to preserve chattel slavery.
Okay but Lenin considered the US Civil to be good actually
But what a pedant, what an idiot would anyone be to deny on these grounds the immense, world-historic, progressive and revolutionary significance of the American Civil War of 1863-65!
The representatives of the bourgeoisie understand that for the sake of overthrowing Negro slavery, of overthrowing the rule of the slaveowners, it was worth letting the country go through long years of civil war, through the abysmal ruin, destruction and terror that accompany every war. But now, when we are confronted with the vastly greater task of overthrowing capitalist wage-slavery, of overthrowing the rule of the bourgeoisie—now, the representatives and defenders of the bourgeoisie, and also the reformist socialists who have been frightened by the bourgeoisie and are shunning the revolution, cannot and do not want to understand that civil war is necessary and legitimate.
https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1918/aug/20.htm
Yes. But these topics about tankies are about reinforcing ‘us/them’ rationalizations for those who already have their prejudice. The comments here certainly do.
By providing a critical thinking from Lenin, you instead become the tankie, and therefore become incapable of critical thinking, per the meme. Therefore anything Lenin might’ve said or written can just be dismissed.
And so the tankie can be mocked as a confederate chud nonetheless.
I had to read this a few times because I am high and thought you were being serious 😭
I don’t want to people to think I’m knowledgeable or well read or anything I just googled it because I wasn’t sure what the meme was trying to say.
And? You seem to be under the delusion that tankies have actually read anything by their heroes.
I think you’re mistaking the lunatic left for the lunatic right. The left usually did their homework at least. Better than the right who refuse to acknowledge what they call “Capitalism” has nothing to do with the foundational principles of the theory.
This is a straw man. Tankie logic clearly understands the concept of factions and factional disputes within a larger system. The US had two major bourgeois factions within it - agrarian raw materials producers/merchants and industrialists. These two factions were fighting for their faction’s existence and ultimately the power to dominate their colonized subjects in the way that seemed most beneficial to their faction.
If you aren’t American: Depicted are American civil war reenactors with the flag of the Confederacy which seceded from the Union of the United States in the 19th century due to built up tensions regarding slavery. The Confederacy were ultimately fighting to keep slavery as a government institution.
The target of the joke are tankies (described briskly above), which we will see on Lemmy, often see any action taken against the US or the EU (the West) as praiseworthy, blatantly disregarding or downplaying equivalent or worse actions from non-western nations.
The subversion of expectation here is that a tankie would see the pro-slavery Confederacy as praiseworthy because they’re fighting the US government, despite the Confederacy’s blatantly immoral cause.
Caveat - I say this with bias as someone explicitly against authoritarian bootlickers, like tankies.
Thank you for your efforts, I really do appreciate it. It makes discussion a lot more accessable to people who do not know the details of US history. I am not american myself but unfortunately I have family who live in Kennesaw. I hope that’s self explanatory 🥲
I guess the joke doesn’t make sense because Lenin thought it was based that the civil war happened because slavery is wack.
You need to tell that to the tankies. We already know it here. They are the ones having problems understanding that.
Sorry tell the tankies what?
Tankies: “Any enemy of the US is my ally”.
It is a zero sum game for them. They are incapable of thinking that while the US sucks, their enemies can also suck.
It is a zero sum game for them.
Who is “them” exactly here? Are you listening to teenagers on TikTok and extrapolating a whole ideology here? Tankies aren’t anti-American by definition. Someone is feeding you some pretty twisted propaganda.
Strawman. Tankies literally have a phrase for this. It’s called “critical support”, which means supporting the efforts of anti-imperialism while reserving the right to criticize without that critique rising to the level of reversing the support for the anti-imperialist action
The kind of revolutionaries they support are morally bankrupt. Like Che Guevara was a complete dick who committed war crimes in order to help install an authoritarian regime in Cuba. Or how Mao got more people killed than anyone in human history and not just his enemies, his supporters too.
What was confusing was the example chosen because it is something Lenin had a position on. Which was the opposite of what was shown. I am coming to understand it’s meant as an absurd example to criticize “tankies” but I guess this example only makes sense if you don’t know that.
I’m also confused about the usage of critical support being contrasted to critical thinking because critical support means applying critical thinking to a situation instead of blanket support. But I guess if you aren’t looking at something with the same values that can be hard to see.
Edit: used an abelist term without realizing it.
Lenin agreed with the union, because slavery is bad. Tankies, because they cherry pick the history they pay attention to would likely ignore that and cheer for the Confederacy. It’s what they do. It’s not that confusing.
I thought tankies was a rude name for Marxist Leninists? I couldn’t tell if the meme was making fun of people who use the term tankie or Marxist Leninists which is why I said I didn’t get it, but I get it now.
Because it doesn’t make sense.
More like look at how the government uses their citizens to fight against each other to decide which wealthy group gets control. Truly a disgusting display of manipulation and inability to govern somehow transformed into “freeing the slaves” when the resulting sharecropping was often worse than slavery. Propaganda is one hell of a drug.
Yeah, no, get outta here with that confederate bullshit. Southern Slavery was an evil institution, and the Union shooting it out of the South was a good thing.
Okay, this person is completely incorrect in their claim about sharecropping. But yes, the US federal government did not think slavery was an issue worth going to war to end. The Confederacy explicitly existed to continue slavery even though it was not threatened whatsoever in the South and more by freesoilers out west, including Lincoln and most “antislavery” activists. The US invaded the Confederacy because the Confederacy picked a fight and decided to shoot first, it was not about any more ground. The decision to implement antislavery policy as a tactic during the war is more accurately attributed to the growing food and resource crisis the Confederacy suffered relative to the huge advantage that guaranteeing freedom to the overwhelming enslaved population there created.
So, yes, it was good that slavery was abolished as a consequence of this War, but it would be distortive to suggest the Union fought to do that specifically.
Oh yes, but the resulting sharecropping was cool and pitting families against each other to fight the wealthy’s war was great. Now run along like a good little propagandized fascist fuck.
TIL being anti-slavery is fascism, poor John Brown
Did I say slavery was a good thing? Man you are fucking stupid.
Bud, I’m gonna have to see some sources on the sharecropping claim. Either you haven’t read enough slave narratives, or there is some insanely obscured events related to sharecropping.
Edit: Okay, so we’ve confirmed this dude is just racist.
It is simple, many slaves were treated better than sharecroppers. There was no freedom other than oppression for sharecroppers. Everytime blacks looked they would get rights the whites came in and destroyed their communities, wealth, and political capital. It was fucking torture that still exists strongly to this day.
If they were free why are they still being abused to this day? Freedom must mean something very different to you.
Bud, you gotta open you eyes to reality. No one in power at the time thought slaves were equal even Lincoln. You are going off of some re-envisioning bullshit. There are more slaves now than at anytime in history.
Okay, Im not 100% certain of what you think you’re saying, but this and the comment below aren’t coherent.
You said sharecropping was worse than slavery, and that is not elevating the systemic racism experienced by African Americans in a post-Civil War era to the present, it actually diminishes it by denying the severity of slavery. I don’t think you realize what you’ve said, because it is immensely racist.
Black women’s bodies were objectified for their reproductive capacity throughout the history of slavery in the US, but especially so in the early decades of the 19th century after the importation of enslaved peoples was banned and the only source of growth for that population was through their bodies. This meant they were raped to produce more slaves dude, sexual violence is inherent to slavery, but think for a minute about just how brutal that single element of the institution is. This is of course not even the only form of sexual violence that occurred within African American enslavement in the US; white slave owners regularly raped women they claimed ownership over, engaged in sexual humiliation as a form of punishment, in Louisiana, wealthy owners would even participate in balls or galas where they’d display their “mistresses,” which were enslaved women.
This isn’t even getting into the myriad of other vectors of violence, the brutal punishments that were inflicted on them, the degree of forced labour, forced malnutrition (yes, worse than simply being a poor farmer), the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850 even allowed the abduction and forced enslavement of relatively any African American in slave or free states should they find themselves in an unfortunate position.
The reason why slavery was bad is the same reason there are constant attempts by racists in the US to claim that racism is over because the “actual” bad elements of it are abolished and the only reason there is discrimination afterward is due to some innate flaw in black people or individuals’ character. They did it after slavery was abolished, after black men were elected to political positions, after the great migration, after the Civil Rights Act, after Obama got elected. Erasing the brutality of slavery to elevate some other form of oppression neglects the reality that those two forms of oppression are relational, both in their historical developments and in the ways each are facilitated within a racist system.
Please, do not spread misinformation irresponsibly, even if you’re trying to do something good.
I didn’t say that. Listen, if you want to make up an argument go ahead. Have fun acting like a dumbass.
I asked for any source and you linked some (inadequate) secondary sources below that simply discuss that sharecropping was discriminatory. Slavery wasn’t bad just because it was racist, and you clearly thought that was the case. I’d be happy to provide a reading list when I have a minute.
Also, you not only said that, but you said it multiple times explicitly throughout this thread. Bud, you gotta stop pretending to know about shit you clearly don’t know well enough about.
What is the serious fuck are you talking about!? I was pointing out the end of slavery didn’t materially improve the lives of sharecroppers in the South. Life got worse, not better which is a conundrum if you believe in a progressive movement in history. They had no protection, they were raped and murdered at will. I am not saying it was better than slavery but rather a new form of torture.
You have got to be trolling or perhaps acting stupid on purpose. I really don’t care at this point.
It is simple, many slaves were treated better than sharecroppers.
How could you possibly know this? What do you mean by “many”? eight? One hundred? Half?
Take a deep breath, calm yourself, and try to focus. I’d ask you to elaborate further on more of your comments, but first, tell me all about how it’s simple to reach that conclusion and how you made it. It should be easy to explain, because it’s simple.
How could you possibly not know this!?
Oh, that is right you have profound ignorance.
https://youtu.be/dgV_0o604bQ?is=cSp8q-0xBIYn4osz
https://wams.nyhistory.org/primary-source/sharecroppers/
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/harvest-sharecropping-slavery-rerouted/
You can draw you own fucking conclusions, but I won’t hold my breath.
One of our biggest, and honestly most important, exports is entertainment. Movies. Books. Television.
Lots of those about WW2. Lots of different stories to tell there and make ourselves the hero.
Especially when most of the time spent between 1945 and 1994 was spent with the USA having a dick measuring contest against the USSR. And we’ve very much proven ourselves to be the biggest dicks.
Could you really blame Putin for his role in this information war, given this context?
Not saying he’s right. Just saying he’s justified. Tit for tat.
We didn’t invent the printing press for sending greeting cards. We didn’t even invent the printing press…but we sure make people think we did.
The biggest export is propaganda.
Trash graphic. 49 year gap, 10 year gap, 11 year gap. Absolute trash.
Link?
Hard to find, they didn’t have internet back in the Civil War days <3
Right, I thought you were talking about something that ACTUALLY happens when the topic comes up, not just being hyperbolic like Trump when decrying socialism.
I take it you’re a “I dislike both sides, we need a return to the middle” type of centrist?
