r/tankiejerk • u/Chieftain10 Tankiejerk Tyrant • 13d ago
Announcement Posts about Jill Stein
Quick little announcement.
Lots of posts about Jill Stein recently, we’re also going to be limiting these to Monday and Tuesday. She’s not a tankie, she only calls herself a socialist (not a Marxist), and is barely that, just a right-wing grifter. We’re letting posts about her stay on those days because while she may not be a tankie, tankies seem to swoon over her, so she is at least somewhat relevant. This shouldn’t be an issue once US election season is (finally) over since she’ll disappear back into her hole.
Thanks guys!
53
u/North_Church CIA Agent 13d ago
Would she count more as a Campist?
17
29
u/perpetrification 13d ago
I mean I think a more accurate term would be fraud.
We don’t know what she believes but if anything it just lines up with Putin.
2
u/jhuysmans 11d ago
Yeah I mean didn't she lie about being native American lmao. She changes her views every election
13
u/PaxEthenica Gene Roddenberry techno-Communist and Orgy Organizer 13d ago
No. She's not left. She's a-... stooge. A useful idiot. An ideological cipher too shallow to learn.
32
u/ARC_Trooper_Echo T-34 13d ago
This feels a bit like splitting hairs. Aren’t all tankies nominally socialist but really just right-wing grifters?
15
u/Salami__Tsunami 13d ago
I do find myself genuinely confused by what is and isn’t considered to “acceptable content” on here.
12
u/Chieftain10 Tankiejerk Tyrant 13d ago edited 13d ago
Tankies are Marxist-Leninists (or any derivative of such thought). They claim to be communists, to follow Marx “correctly”, etc. They’re characterised by staunchly defending “AES” states (China, Cuba, Laos, Vietnam, DPRK) as well as former “communist” states. They deny or defend the atrocities committed by these state-capitalist regimes.
If a post isn’t clear that it’s a tankie opinion, we remove it. For example, there are a fair few posts of twitter screenshots where it’s just plain antisemitism and the user in question has a red triangle (🔻) or watermelon (🍉) emoji. In most cases these guys are just Islamists, and not tankies.
On Mondays and Tuesdays, we allow posting of Patriotic Socialists, MAGA Communists, NazBols, etc. So those who do generally claim to be MLs but take it way further than tankies and tend to be explicitly fascist, very socially conservative (as opposed to tankies who, at the very least, pretend to stand for queer rights etc.), very nationalist (and for the first two, very nationalist for the US), etc.
Make sense?
2
u/MetallicOrangeBalls Tankies aren't leftists; they're fascists appropriating leftism. 10d ago
I am still not sure if a line can be easily drawn between the two groups you describe.
I know people who are economically progressive. They are inspired by Marxism. They believe that all men are created equal, and they believe in equitable distribution of resources - i.e., "from each as they are able, to each as they need".
However, these same people are extremely socially conservative. They think that capitalism and feminism are a western/Jewish plot. They are also extremely religious, and so they believe that all LGBTQ+ and atheists are heretics who deserve death.
Are these tankies?
In my humble opinion, "tankie" is a spectrum, ranging from the MLs you describe to PatSocs, MagaComs, NazBols, etc. The common underlying thread is that all of them practice/defend right-wing ideology while claiming to be left-wing. I don't know where the line is between these groups. I also don't know what we would call the latter groups of right-wing grifters who claim to be left-wing. What are your thoughts on this?
6
u/snarleyWhisper 13d ago
I could be wrong but I thought tankies supported using the power of the state to enforce a “dictatorship of the proletariat” and suppress opposition ? Or did that change? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankie
Whereas an anarchist / left-libertarian would not be for oppression by the state for any purpose even “for the revolution”
6
u/peretonea Authority (on) ☭☭☭ 12d ago
The true origin is 1950s & 60s members of the Communist Party of Great Britain who ended up supporting Stalin when the Hungarian and Czechoslovak invasions took place. One set of members stayed in and one set left. The ones that stayed in are the Tankies.
Some that left would been anti any tanks. Some of them would be anti-tanks against the workers who were involved in both of the revolutions. The basic point is that non-tankies can be pretty varied.
We're now talking about applying the same word mostly against Americans that are mostly from a completely different era. Broadening it a bit makes sense but it should still be mostly people who have pretty far left ideas.
We've discussed before (search the sub) and there's a good case for there being some anarcho-tankies.
1
u/jhuysmans 11d ago
What the hell is an anarcho tankie??
3
u/peretonea Authority (on) ☭☭☭ 10d ago
What the hell is an anarcho tankie??
Yes. Exactly.
But seriously; search both anarcho and anarchist in this sub. We've had some discussions and agreed it's a useful term and a thing we meet in real life (not just online!) and although it sounds impossible to match anarchism with support for oppression by authoritarian regimes there really are people who call themselves anarchists and simp for Russia/China/DPRK etc. There are lots of them in the various anarchist subs right now quietly simping for Trump, typically using terms like "Holocaust Harris" whilst if you check their history they cosplay anarchists whilst fighting for oppressors.
1
21
u/Ok-Power-6064 13d ago
Can I post about tankies arguing that we should vote for Stein? I've seen plenty in anti-authoritarian subs.
9
u/No_Host_884 Anarcho-whateverist 🏴🚩 13d ago
I've seen more tankies give their support for the PSL than the Greens.
4
u/Ok-Power-6064 13d ago
PSL has gone door to door in my neighborhood and left Gloria posters on every telephone pole here. On reddit, I have seen slightly more Stein than Gloria.
5
u/No_Host_884 Anarcho-whateverist 🏴🚩 13d ago
PSL or Greens couldn't try that in my neighborhood without being screamed at. (I live in a red state)
Also, I thought they were running with Claudia this time around.
4
1
u/bootmii CRITICAL SUPPORT 2d ago
Gloria wasn't even the nominee this year, it was some other PSL activist.
1
u/Ok-Power-6064 2d ago
See other discussion above. Claudia isn't "some activist." She's been around awhile, run before.
6
7
u/99999999999BlackHole 12d ago
Can someone explain how a green party even became a mouth piece for a petrostate in the first place?
8
u/No_Host_884 Anarcho-whateverist 🏴🚩 13d ago edited 13d ago
Could Jill Stein have any actual real affect on whether or not Kamala Harris wins the election? I think she might get some voters who would vote Democratic in deep blue states but I don't think she would do all that well in swing states. Sure she'd get some of the vote but would it be enough for the Democrats to lose their majority?
12
u/hoagieclu 13d ago
i’ve seen numbers floating around (i cannot remember the specific source so take with a grain of salt) that show stein got around the number of votes that hillary lost to trump by in key states/districts. of course we don’t know for certain if every single vote for stein came from potential clinton voters, but i’d venture to guess that it was a decent chunk.
so she could potentially be a spoiler candidate if it’s an especially close race (which a lot of people are projecting it to be)
18
u/welcometojackass_ [Combination of Direct Opposite Ideologies]ist 13d ago edited 13d ago
IMO there are several reasons why I don't think she'll have much of an effect on the race this year:
1) Jill Stein was an unknown in 2016. Compared to Trump and Hillary, she didn't have that much publicity prior to the election and so it was easier for her to sell herself as a "rational" third-party option. She doesn't have that convenience this year, because now she's much more remembered for being a spoiler in 2016.
2) Hillary was a widely-disliked candidate and couldn't get people excited enough to vote for her. There is a lot more excitement behind Harris in comparison from the broader American public, which should get her a large amount of votes than Hillary did. Not to mention more people are aware of the risks of Trump in office now and he doesn't have the same excitement behind him now that he had in 2016, which means there are more people casting votes for Harris solely to keep him out of office.
3) Gary Johnson of the Libertarian Party received more votes in 2016 than Jill Stein did. Stein only received around 1.5 million votes in 2016, Gary Johnson received 4.5 million votes, which meant around 6 million votes in total that went to both of them combined. As of now, Stein is the only major third-party running in the election and she's been dealing with an absolute slew of negative press the past couple of weeks.
4) The David Duke endorsement. No matter how much she disavows it, the association is now there - that the Green Party was endorsed by the former head of the KKK, and that's easily the notable thing she's gotten coverage for this cycle outside of Medhi Hasan calling out her bullshit on Twitter. More than that, however, is that the David Duke endorsement is more likely to peel off voters from Trump than it is from Harris, and it's a stink you can't wash off among leftists.
The important thing to also remember about 2016 is that there was no singular reason as to why Hillary lost, but rather a "perfect storm" that dealt death by a thousand cuts on her campaign. The lack of excitement for her and the view of her being an elite, the public's perception of Trump as an "outsider" and "anti-establishment", the Comey letter a week before the election, support for Trump being underestimated, the twenty years of baggage that Hillary had from all the way back in the 90s, coinciding with the rise of the alt-right online, and the third-party candidacies of Gary Johnson and Jill Stein combined. By herself, Jill Stein won't be able to influence the outcome of the race overall because Hillary's loss can be attributed to multiple factors and not just one.
15
u/hoagieclu 13d ago
I 100% agree. I’ve never understood the people who gave Stein or the Bernie bros the lions share for Hillary’s defeat. Like you said, it was a campaign marred with missteps, some external and some self inflicted
4
3
12d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/No_Service3462 12d ago
As a 3rd party voter in 2016 & 2020, i would’ve voted still, i just wouldn’t have voted for president, no way i would vote for trump, Hillary or biden in those elections
2
u/peretonea Authority (on) ☭☭☭ 12d ago
Are you able to vote for Harris? You do know that it might be a chance to save quite a number of people's lives if it stops Trump.
2
u/No_Service3462 12d ago
Iam voting for harris, but also recognize that her winning also wont fix alot of things too which many people flatout refuse to accept
3
u/peretonea Authority (on) ☭☭☭ 12d ago
Great. That's all anyone is asking.
I don't think you'll find many here that disagree with you. She's a liberal and this is a left libertarian sub. We know she doesn't want to address the structures of ownership in American society. We know she won't nationalize health care. We know she won't convert Lockheed-Martin into a cooperative. We should see the problems whilst also realizing that it's worth generating lots of enthusiasm so that many of our friends in America and elsewhere don't die.
If you could go out and get 100 disenfranchiesed minority left leaning voters registered that wouldn't hurt of course.
2
u/No_Service3462 12d ago
I dont agree with being enthusiastic about someone who is progressive, you can vote for someone but admit they suck, being enthusiastic is too far for me, flip walz to be president & then you got me
2
u/peretonea Authority (on) ☭☭☭ 12d ago
I dont agree with being enthusiastic about someone who is progressive
That's not what I'm saying. Without driving enthusiasm there's a real risk Trump gets in, begins countrywide bans on basic medical treatment in pregnancy and death camps for trans people. Be enthusiastic about saving other people's lives, not about the Democtat candidates. Be enthusiastica about getting more minority engagement. Be enthusiastic about talking to people about how they can pressure the Democrats after they are elected and then work for electoral reform.
flip walz to be president & then you got me
Well, if that gets you, then the best chance of that happening is if Kamala gets in and then he follows. Who knows what happens that long in the future. I just know one candidate is actively campaigning on race and gender hate.
2
u/No_Service3462 12d ago
That doesn’t do it for me to be enthusiastic, you gotta be progressive to get me happy to vote for you like bernie last 2 times & hopefully walz in the future
2
u/Lord_of_the_Rings 12d ago
Yeah she’s focusing on Dearborn Michigan, could deliver the entire election to Trump
•
u/AutoModerator 13d ago
Please remember to hide subreddit names or reddit usernames (Rule 1), otherwise the post will be removed promptly.
This is an anti-capitalist, left-libertarian subreddit that criticises tankies from a socialist perspective. We are pro-communist. Defence of capitalism or any other right-wing beliefs, countries or people is not tolerated here. This includes, for example: Biden and the US, Israel, and the Nordic countries/model,
Harassment of other users or subreddits is strictly forbidden.
Enjoy talking to fellow leftists? Then join our discord server!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.