• ItsYaBoiBananaBoi@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Mutual aide is not really the issue with tankies, the problem is the authoritarianism. Mutual aide can be very effective when done properly. For example, anarchists tend to answer the question of “leeches” by giving them the resources to self-actualize, and if the “leech” does not care to do that, they can be kicked out of an anarchist community.

    • TheGreatSpoon@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Authoritarianism isn’t a thing. No state wants to suppress dissent.

      Dissent is suppressed when it needs to be because there’s foreign powers trying to destabilize your state. Like when the most powerful country in the world creates a Central Intelligence Agency with the overt purpose of eradicating communism. Which they did covertly through the funding of internal dissent, terrorism and sabotage of infrastructure.

      Unless you think the CIA just twiddled their thumbs for 70 years, of course. In that case I recommend reading the book ‘Killing Hope’ by William Blum.

      • LambdaDuck@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        wait, so you’re saying that even the fascist states (e.g. the nazis) were only trying to defend themselves against foreign powers trying to destabilize their state? or am i misinterpreting you?

        a state doesn’t have a mind of its own, it consists of people and those people are often power-hungry and do actively want to suppress dissent regardless of what would be good for the state. the whole point of socialism is to dismantle hierarchies, but by placing a powerful leader without accountability on the top you have undermined the whole concept

        maybe cia actions were what caused them to be authoritarian, but that doesn’t excuse their actions in any way. the moment they became authoritarian, cia had already defeated socialism

        suppressing “dissent” in the form of e.g. refusing to follow laws about distribution of resources (within reason) is one thing, but suppressing dissenting voices is a whole different thing altogether and those two shouldn’t be lumped together in one category. the former is a part of the normal job of a state while the latter is authoritarianism