reading the list of ideologies “harmful to the global south” and comparing it to the ideologies that the global south has tried and gotten results from and drawing no conclusions
You must log in or # to comment.
Incredibly funny to me that anarcho-feminism and queer anarchism are in different tiers. Like yeah dude let’s start ranking liberatory struggles good idea, tell me which types of anti racism are “very cool” and which are just “aight” next
Love to rank peoples very real struggles and traumas.
One of them is too close to real though, which is scary
there’s no way I could ever know what all those flags mean also why are they polandballs
there’s no way I could ever know what all those flags mean also why are they polandballs
Probably because a map-game brained 15 year old made this.
Probably because a map-game brained
15 year oldunpaid bureau intern made this.
That’s actually the flag of the Ba’ath Party in Iraq and Syria. Both it and the Palestinian flag are based on the earlier Arab Revolt flag.
(Not excusing this tierlist at all though, it’s still awful)
oh whoops nvm
“I like socialism until it actually exists”: a tierlist.
Amazing how every choice on this chart boils down to this, virtually no exception
god damn the marketplace of ideology is looking well stocked today
But like a capitalist supermarket, it’s full of the same product repackaged 15 times.
97% of socialists who have ever existed are in the green verbose box
Those ideologies that turned previously backwater countries into superpowers who became the first to visit space?
Sorry sweaty, they actually harmed those counties 💅
Funniest part is how the dichotomy here is “harmed” vs. “never touched at all”. Hmmm I wonder what their agenda is…
It’s actually sad to me how low Ho Chi Minh thought is.
Vietnam resisted US imperialism and won. They haven’t been the target of such a focused propaganda campaign like DPRK or China. There’s no reason to believe they’ve done anything wrong. No atrocity propaganda comes out of Vietnam. They mind their own fucking business and try to help their people.
And still, STILL it’s not good enough for western leftists. It’s fucking pathetic.
well the thing is the fact that they successfully fought the us means they MUST have done some great evil, right?
100% i’m used to all the shit the other tendencies gets but i have no clue how someone who believes themselves to be on the left could possibly hate Uncle Ho.
No atrocity propaganda comes out of Vietnam.
Clearly someone hasn’t seen Rambo II
Most of these aren’t real ideologies but just being an anarchist and also another thing
yeah i can’t imagine being an anarchist who places any importance at all in your tendency label. like do you have a body of theory that you value? no not a page on the /r/PCM wiki, i mean something that someone who wanted to drive a stake through the heart of the state wrote.
If your ideology doesn’t exist in the real world, it can’t do anything bad or tankie to ruin it.
harmful to the global south
Chavismo
Maoism
Ba’athism
Juche
Ho Chi Mihn Thought
Harm is when you improve the country and the living conditions
Love how all these are all unique and localized reponses from the global south yet they are damaging somehow lol. Something something civilizing mission.
I thought Tito was generally pretty well liked, too?
Making a tier list of how effectively different ideologies have been able to improve material conditions, but making it upside down on purpose.
social democracy in the same tier as marxism-leninism
Juche, national bolshevism, social democracy, they’re basically the same thing with different names.
deleted by creator
Ya, I knew I was being overly broad in that assessment when I noticed that.
It’s still mostly accurate besides a few
outliers like that.
putting all the ideologies into “liberalism” tier
4 tiers of “Hasn’t made a material impact on the world” and one tier of “Has made a material impact on the world”
I’d move Anarcho-communism/syndicalism down to the bottom tier because they also had material impact on world, while moving nazbol, “unconditional accelerationism” and… I think it says Ujaman? The green one on the very berry bottom. No offense but I haven’t heard of it. Anyways, move those three out of there, and lastly merge Leninism, Marxism-Leninism, and Stalinism into one, because thats just repeating yourself three times.
I think it says Ujaman? The green one on the very berry bottom. No offense but I haven’t heard of it.
It’s Ujamaa, the guiding ideology of Tanzania under Nyerere.
Oh that’s really neat actually. It can stay in the bottom row, though a shame that Tanzania acts as a U.S military outpost on the eastern coast of Africa.
Platformism: good
Leninism, MLism, etc.: counter-revolutionaryCouncil communism: aite
Titoism: counter-revolutionaryLiberation theology: aite
Leninism, MLism etc: counter-revolutionaryEgoism, anti-civ: not counter-revolutionary
Make it make sense…
Also this person hasn’t read any Ho Chi Minh thought, nor Nyerere or Juche theory, I would bet money on this.
What’s a good source for Juche?
I’d go to the stuff published by Foreign Languages on Juche and what Kim Il-Sung et al. have written tbh.
I’m far from an expert but that’s where you’ll find the primary sources in their own terms.
“Egoism” is somehow the least surprising choice to include, LMAO
stop trying to make forms of analysis into tendencies reddit. intersectionality is not a fucking political program
Good = things that now exist largely as quirky choices in the ideology section of the supermarket. Bad = anything that has actually managed to win any power
Why is anarcho-bidenism not included in the list btw?
how is “post civ” very cool but “anarcho primitivism” no bueno?
aren’t they the same thing?
edit: and "anti civ"is in the aite row.
“some people on twitter said that anarcho primitivism is based, but some other people said it’s equivalent to fascism. i cannot be bothered to find out what their arguments actually were, and i have never actually read any critiques of civilization because my interest in the topic extends to finding a new polandball guy to draw, so i’ll uncritically download and repeat both opinions as my own.”
anti/post “civ” is a different critique from the primitivist one, its not about technology but like the ideological/cultural construction of “civilisation” and its opposite “uncivilized”.
i’ve read some okay takes on it, but its not like a full political programme. not that that stops these reddit idiots trying to invent tendencies, lol
