I don’t know what kind of engagement to expect, but I made a post encouraging Raddle users to come here. It appeared to be an exclusively leftist space and be an active forum.

Having styled this post as an AMA, I may be unprepared for some of their questions. I haven’t been on here very long, and may be fielding questions that are better directed to Lemmy devs or long-time users. I am happy to x-post questions and answers to their platform on your behalves

Shoutout to @Amorphous@lemmygrad.ml for giving me the idea in the chapo thread

  • Muad'DibberMA
    10·
    4 years ago

    They definitely aren’t communists, and don’t allow them over at raddle. Here’s the person who runs that instance: https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/ziq-tankies-and-the-left-unity-scam

    They brigaded here posting a bunch of anti-stalin / anti-maduro articles, and are still angry about being banned. This would be equivalent to me brigading there posting a meme about emma goldman calling lenin a “shrewd asiatic” and then screaming about them hating asian people after a ban.

      • RandomSovietKid
        8·
        4 years ago

        Yeah, really:

        Before Stalin and Mao’s collectivization and industrialization, most peasants were largely self sufficient. They lived simple uncomplicated lives in harmony with nature; having no carbon footprint to speak of, most enjoyed relative autonomy from the state, practiced mutual aid with their neighbors, and only needed to work a few hours a week [1] to produce all the food they needed to survive. The progression of Soviet state capitalism quickly changed all this, and they now had to labor endlessly in grungy, polluted cities or on industrial battery-farms for the state or face being branded a “kulak” and exiled, imprisoned or killed.

        Imagine defending the tsarist regime to own the tankies… :face with rolling eyes: The source they put doesn’t even mention the Russian late 19th / early 20th century peasants. It’s about peasants in the UK of the middle ages up to 1600. And that source doesn’t come to the conclusion that they only worked a few hours a week, it comes to the conclusion that they worked on less days. Direct quote from the source (emphasis mine):

        14th century - Casual laborer, U.K.: 1440 hours

        Calculated from Nora Ritchie’s estimate of 120 days per year. Assumes 12-hour day. (“Labour conditions in Essex in the reign of Richard II”, in E.M. Carus-Wilson, ed., Essays in Economic History, vol. II, London: Edward Arnold, 1962).

        Also, note how they don’t mention the conditions of the Russian proletariat in the cities (yes, it was already there before Stalin’s industrialization, go read a history book; I also remember reading a good article about it, but can’t find it anymore). They don’t mention the recurring famines. They don’t mention who the kulaks actually were — big land owners who were exploiting others’ labour. Something that, you know, someone who calls themselves anarchist should be against.

        About industrialization… remember, all capitalist had united to destroy the first socialist state. Both by direct invasion, and by sanctions. So, it was “either we industrialize, or we are crushed”. Sure, the conditions may have been “grungy, polluted cities” for some time. But are they seriously arguing that Russia by, let’s say, the 50s, would have been better off being an semi-agrarian country?

        Where did that person get their ideas about pre-revolution Russia? Disney movies? :face with raised eyebrow:

        • HildegardeOP
          6·
          4 years ago

          Good job poking holes, i didnt want to read that junk, but I was sure there would be some serious bullshit in the citations