brain_in_a_box [he/him]

Foreign powers unilaterally divided the country in half, and the actual country itself just has to accept it?

As ever, actual Jewish Holocaust scholars agree with us

https://jewishcurrents.org/the-double-genocide-theory

Not by “assigning a slightly different definition”, just by applying the definition consistently, rather than using the standard.

Is that from the same anime as your last line?

Like trying to reframe my argument as “rich country good, poor country bad”?

No reframing needed, that was just your argument.

You’ve tried to dismiss my argument by misrepresenting it.

So what exactly is your argument?

This level of insecurity shows how shallow your beliefs are.

Lol, what anime did you crib this line from?

No, it’s that saying one place is worse doesn’t make it so.

Correct, you saying Cuba is worse doesn’t make it so.

Human development index and quality of life studies put the US ahead of Cuba

“Rich country good, poor country bad”

Cuba has better healthcare and lower cost of living, but Americans aren’t on rafts to Cuba.

“Rich country good, poor country bad”

One of the problems with enacting good and lasting change in the western world is that life is pretty darn good on the whole.

Yes, because the West ruthlessly exploits the global south to prop of it’s own standards of living. This is why serious socialist revolutions have mostly only occurred in the Global South.

It could be a lot better, but just shouting that the US is bad is mindless propagada. Be better than that.

Real bad faith framing of your opponents argument there; be better than that.

So once again, your argument is “rich country good, poor country bad”

“Rich country good, poor country bad!”

Very astute political analysis there

That doesn’t change the context at all. Dissent from the capitalist class is still dissent.

You’re spun around, flipped upside-down, and confused as can be.

Very compelling, but have you considered

Tankie is a term that specifically refers to one particular kind of communism

No, it’s used to refer a wide, vague blob of vibes, just like the word woke. The people who use it can can do use it to refer to all kinds of communists, most anarchists, and anything to the left of Elizabeth Warren in general.

that try to impose communism through the use of force.

As opposed to the kind of communism where you ask nicely for revolution? Have you actually read any Marx? I guarantee he was not a pacifist.

You can be a communist and not be a tankie

By your own definition you cannot, let alone by a definition of tankie that describes how libs actually use it.

And when people say they are “anti-tankie”, they actually mean that they are anti doing anything about the awareness of systematic inequality that tankie indicates. By definition, someone who is against change/progress is a conservative, so when someone says they are anti-tankie, they are by definition expressing a conservative stance. That is, wanting to do something about systemic inequality is synonymous with having a progressive stance on systemic inequality.

Being a tankie, on the other hand, is not synonymous with being a comunist. Tankies are just one form of communist (militant).

Other way around: communists are just one form of tankies, the word is also used to refer to anarchists and some soc-dems.

“Being anti-woke doesn’t mean I’m conservative!”