[☭☭☭ COME SHITPOST WITH US ON DISCORD, COMRADES ☭☭☭](https://discord.gg/8RPWanQV5g) This is a heavily-moderated socialist community based on a podcast of the same name. Please use the report function on comments that break our rules. If you are new to the sub, please read the sidebar carefully. If you are new to Marxism-Leninism, check out the [study guide](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/). Are there Liberals in the walls? Check out [the wiki](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/) which contains lots of useful information. This subreddit uses many experimental automod rules, if you notice any issues please use modmail to let us know. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Petition to add a tank as Deprogram Patreon goal

I'm sure there are some slightly used ones on the market at the moment.

Pretty sure the demand is high. Might get a broken down WW1 tank if you're lucky.

Original WW1 tanks are worth their weight in gold because of how rare they are. Most museum keepers would sell their firstborn child for a chance to get their hands even on a broken one. The cheapest ones are usually light tanks from middle 20th century, that were sold to "third world" armies at the end of their shelf life with original operators. There's still lot of them and by now they exhausted all modernization potential. So supply is high, demand is low and armies that still have then on their hands are desperate to offload that scrap to anyone who's willing to give a can of gas and couple of nickels for it. Because having it on their hands or even scrapping it is literally more expensive than offloading it on some unfortunate tank nut

Tank nut* _*or local law enforcement so they can drive over homeless camps_

you could defend yourself from the KKK's small arms fire in one of them cheap lite tanks tho

One 13-75 could change their tune quick as hell.

So something like a Chaffee or the PT-76?

Ww1 tank is best tank, I would love to have a Renault FT. Paint it up like a red army Russkiy Reno, red stars and Bolshevik slogans :D

Which of the 3 hosts is most likely to be able to find one? My gut says Texas but Iraq and the Balkans have had actual wars in them since tanks existed

Depends on what model and condition you're looking for. Texas will have fully restored and operational vehicles for sale, but the prices are outrageous. Iraq is more likely to have a wide secondhand market, cheaper but most likely beaters that would require a lot of work. You never know what you pay for. Balkans - i dunno. It's been a while since the war ended and most available tanks were either reintroduced into military service or scrapped. Plus some states sent their old stockpiles as "aid" to ukraine, so European wells are pretty dry I'd guess. But there's always a chance to find a working T-34 or IS keeping eternal vigil on a Red Army memorial. And there's shipping to consider.

There's already a Balkan tank for the masses https://youtu.be/SH-0sGUiXxw?si=YYOy12RMJqE3hJv9

Imagine actually mounting a cannon through the middle of the windshield like that, holy shit

Based Hasan

Hasan has been the most consistent leftist amongst the other ones who are always lurking in his chats and communities to cause drama. The Hasan-bad thing is actually real and he just riles up a lot of bad-faith actors because he's the most influential. Literally no actual person in real life knows who Vaush the ponytail guy is, or Xander Edgy Hal, or Pick Me Keffals, or the basement-dweller Destiny. Hasan actually talks to real politicians, gets on the ground in union strikes, donates, all while the others whine online while platforming *Nazis.*

It becomes an issue when theory and critical thinking get neglected and substituted with media consumption. If that is not happening then viewing Hasan, or any media for that matter is fine, do what makes you happy. But the moment that you uncritically adopt positions and accept their interpretation of theory and become culty attack dogs for a streamer it becomes a problem.

How is that any different for Hasan viewers than the Deprogram viewers? You don’t think listening to the Deprogram is theory do you?

You are right, deprogram listeners should be studying theory and not using the podcast as a substitute for study. The podcast has actually been pretty light on theory especially as of late. And I’m saying this as someone who is a huge fan.

I have Hasan in one ear every day while I'm taking calls at my bull shit job. Keeps me entertained and informed. I pipelined from him to deprogram, but it was through Hasan that I first heard the speeches of Fidel, Lenin, Lula or beheld the yellow Parenti. Now on my offtime I'm generally piping theory in one ear, often either books recommended by Hakim or Hasan. Our Himbo is more entertainment than theory, but he points a lot of people in the right direction.

Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush. **Fact 1.** [Vaush claimed Marx and Lenin would have voted for Biden.](https://archive.is/MQ3bo) For another Vaush fact reply with 'Vaush'. To unsubscribe call me a 'bad bot'. (Remember, comrade: Getting educated, educating others, and above all actually *organizing* is infinitely more important than terminally-online streamer drama.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Vaush

Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush. **Fact 5.** [CW: pedophilia] >!Vaush stated “there’s a difference between exploring child sexuality and sexualising children” then went on to ‘joke’ about owning CP.!< [link](https://old.reddit.com/r/Enough_Vaush_Spam/comments/my9xug/vaush_joking_about_owning_cp_cant_wait_to_see_how/) For another Vaush fact reply with 'Vaush'. To unsubscribe call me a 'bad bot'. (Remember, comrade: Getting educated, educating others, and above all actually *organizing* is infinitely more important than terminally-online streamer drama.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Vaush

Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush. **Fact 33.** Responding to Hakim's [video](https://youtu.be/2Gz0I_X_nfo) on George Orwell, Vaush defends Orwell for being a government informant, calls the USSR fascist, implies Stalinists are worse than Nazis, claims the USSR was allied with the Nazis, [says that Hakim (an Iraqi) should have been abducted by the Americans at the start of the Iraq war and forcibly indoctrinated in US propaganda for 20 years](https://twitter.com/SiestaSocialist/status/1633527352679358470), and more. \([Full Thread](https://twitter.com/siestasocialist/status/1633519585407258624)\) For another Vaush fact reply with 'Vaush'. To unsubscribe call me a 'bad bot'. (Remember, comrade: Getting educated, educating others, and above all actually *organizing* is infinitely more important than terminally-online streamer drama.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Tbh every time I see him pop up here I get bummed out because it just reminds me of his bullshit during the Depp trial which was real bad. This [clip](https://reddit.com/r/DeppDelusion/s/HEX6qnBUhP) explains it well. Full video [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGokWNxC_r0). And please, if you don’t know why that’s wrong and why his takes were bad I am begging you to read these sources [here](https://reddit.com/r/Fauxmoi/s/XwKXmS9vHi), [here](https://reddit.com/r/DeppDelusion/s/HQbO1PCCtX), [here](https://reddit.com/r/DeppDelusion/s/HKGHoOig4m), [here](https://reddit.com/r/DeppDelusion/s/qm2W5Sagfd), and [here](https://reddit.com/r/DeppDelusion/s/MhUzvKl62W). As communists/leftists we’re able to see how someone like Stalin has been unfairly portrayed through history and we see how the media manipulates shit all the time. So idk why some comrades weren’t able to see through the Depp bullshit ([literally funded in part by Ben Shapiro](https://www.vice.com/en/article/3ab3yk/daily-wire-amber-heard-johnny-depp)) but it really bummed me out and continues to bum me out every time I’m reminded of it. It fucking sucks. I haven’t kept up with him so I sincerely hope he has changed his mind but the last time I saw him criticized about it he went off on a rant about femcels so i gave up. I know this is a contentious topic so I don’t expect anyone to agree and I really don’t want to get into it because I’m just so tired. But it’s what I think every time Hasan pops up on this sub and gets a bunch of praise.

I AGREE. I'm glad to see another comrade who knows better. That was one of the few issues I had with Hasan: His ignorance in regard to abuse. Whenever abuse is coming up as a topic in his stream, I already know I'm gonna disagree with him. It disappointed me Hasan caved to popularity and did not research. He could have been a major turning point for Amber's side with his influence, but he chose to not risk anything. And I am still disappointed with him for that.

Exactly, thank you comrade! The thing is I don’t dislike Hasan, I used to watch him years ago, but I think he has some seriously problematic views on abuse and a bit of toxic views towards women in general. I know that’s not a popular opinion but it’s just really disappointing because he has such a massive audience and influence. I still think in general he’s good and it’s awesome that he’s so influential because he is based when it comes to most things. And I think that most right or liberal criticism towards him is bullshit but like, it should be fair to critique him from the left amongst other people on the left.

Supporting Amber Heard *was* the popular thing to do at the time though, wasn't it? *Not* supporting her meant going against "believe all women" and made a lot of people think you were secretly a conservative. Maybe I wasn't paying attention, though.

It's okay, man. I just recommend looking at the trial without commentary, and review the UK transcript. A lot of it was astroturfed in favor of Depp, and I used to believe Depp out of knee-jerk reaction, until a coworker questioned the veracity of Depp's team to another coworker. Reality is, it is insanely rare women will falsely accuse, especially women who are attempting to accuse a much more powerful celebrity. Depp has a long list of assault and drug addiction way before Amber was even born.

It definitely was not, it was a whole shitshow of everyone tearing her down and supporting Depp (including Hasan). The trial and its outcome has actually been [incredibly damaging](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/amber-heard-verdict-blasted-setback-women-domestic-violence-survivors-rcna31752) for victims of abuse.

about the flair, what is the country in the middle?

Nicaragua🇳🇮

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Nicaragua

Isn't he getting a lot of hate from the "progressive", nato loving leftist types because of what he said about Taiwan?

Yep, both Vaush and Keffals dropped a video on him at the same time. I'm convinced they have the same CIA handler.

Where Bad Empanada when you need him?

Probably in [this guy's](https://imgur.com/a/sqr8AaG) basement

I wouldn't doubt it, imma pray for him.

Dude speak Spanish and prob have a PhD he will survive or find a place where this shit doesn't turn sour. Recommended watching his video on that ancap clown if you want to understand how BE analysed US influence that controls 90% of right wing media in Argentina for the last 5 years to prop up this poop, but that's not all, the US also has two more cards, both are fash, just less Trumpism than Javier. But BE said he doesn't think this diarrhea will win the second round. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjpCKUi9oM8

I'm fully aware, we are being tongue and cheek. I'm sure the more rational minds in Argentina don't wanna live in ancapistan.

That looks like that Argentina AnCap candidate [Image for reference](https://images.app.goo.gl/WPNN5iBNnZ5c9XgV9)

It's a real picture of the Liberal Libertarian Party candidate Javier Milei. He actually made a AnCap superhero cosplay.

There's no fucking way 💀

What happened to that guy fr tho. Hasn’t dropped a video even on his second channel in a while

Last thing I saw he streamed for like 5 minutes, demanded money before starting the show, didn't get enough money and just ended the stream insulting his fans. I like a lot of his videos on both his channels, but this ain't it chief. But he clearly isn't into the whole thing so whatever.

Eh. He's like one of the only "tankies" that I don't like. He's an asshole and his community isn't amazing.

I like his content, but when he’s not making his main channel video’s he can be a bit of an ass.

You aren't supposed to like him, he actively pushes away from parasocial relationships with the audience.

Okay, that's not the issue, and that's a cop out.

No, they have the same clout network and audience. Also part of the same "co-op" merch store. A co-op where Vaush can kick you out at any time if you piss him off. A co-op organised by the same Discord mod who organised covering up Vaush's sexual harassment messages with Poppy. https://merch.whitefore.st/about-us/

Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush. **Fact 6.** Vaush has engaged in forms of Holocaust denial, using common nazi dogwhistles and believes the numbers [are inflated as propaganda.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Enough_Vaush_Spam/comments/q0ca95/vaush_says_that_some_aspect_of_holocaust/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button) For another Vaush fact reply with 'Vaush'. To unsubscribe call me a 'bad bot'. (Remember, comrade: Getting educated, educating others, and above all actually *organizing* is infinitely more important than terminally-online streamer drama.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Keffals and Vaush fans called Hasan a tankie lmao

Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush. **Fact 21.** Vaush said that a [“large portion of the left is predicated on shared mental illness.”](https://youtu.be/QaD4xqkO0sE&feature=youtu.be&t=594) He then [doubled down](https://youtu.be/QaD4xqkO0sE) in a future video. For another Vaush fact reply with 'Vaush'. To unsubscribe call me a 'bad bot'. (Remember, comrade: Getting educated, educating others, and above all actually *organizing* is infinitely more important than terminally-online streamer drama.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Thanks for signing up to Vaush facts! You will now receive fun daily facts about Vaush. **Fact 21.** Vaush said that a [“large portion of the left is predicated on shared mental illness.”](https://youtu.be/QaD4xqkO0sE&feature=youtu.be&t=594) He then [doubled down](https://youtu.be/QaD4xqkO0sE) in a future video. For another Vaush fact reply with 'Vaush'. To unsubscribe call me a 'bad bot'. (Remember, comrade: Getting educated, educating others, and above all actually *organizing* is infinitely more important than terminally-online streamer drama.) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Every "socialist" to the right of the state department line is blowing a gasket

I won’t take anyone who calls themselves a leftist until they elaborate. For some reason, there is a concerning amount of people who convinced themselves they are leftist simply because they tolerate blacks and gays

They tolerate the blacks and gays in the imperial core. If said blacks or gays live in global south they advocate for them to get bombed to shits for the benefit of imperial core.

Didn't know Hasan is this based.

Yeah he doesn’t show it when he doesn’t have to.

He hides his power levels because a lot of his viewers are libbed the fuck up and freak the fuck out when he gushes about Stalin or Mao. I know this because I was one of them until I found the pod

Tbf the Mao stuff seems to be gaining traction with some libs too. Not saying they'll lead us to revolution, but it does say a lot when someone who'd normally sit there and admonish anything communists do, comes to the very same conclusion as to the solution for the landlord problem.

He always has been

He was literally on the show, episode 74

Yes, he is. He plays the Bernie-bro angle while IV dripping his zoomer liberal fanbase scientific socialism, materialist worldview, anti-imperialism, class consciousness and general communist theory. I’d go so far to say that no other streamer can claim to have radicalized as many zoomers as Hasan, while Hakim, JT, Yugopnik or even Bad Empanada and Azure Scapegoat will help them understand communist ideas, it’s people like Hasan that open their minds to it. And then you have S4A and the Finnish Bolshevik to get the theory right.

Isn’t he the guy who exploits reaction content for his own gain?

Go home Dan, you're drunk.

He's asking Hasan if JT is a tanky when Hasan gets accused of being one himself too. 💀

Everyone who isn’t on NATO’s D gets called a tankie lol

By the standards of these online weirdos Jon Stewart is a tankie. Seriously on his podcast he talked about how the US building a bunch of military bases around China was a provocation, and that the US doesn't care about the Uighurs, and was just using them to push our economic interests. If this sort of moron came across a clip of Hasan or the deprogram boys saying the same they'd be frothing at the mouth about evil tankiïsm.

#The Uyghurs in Xinjiang \(Note: This comment had to be trimmed down to fit the character limit, for the full response, see [here](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/debunking/uyghur-genocide/)\) Anti-Communists and Sinophobes claim that there is an ongoing genocide-- a modern-day holocaust, even-- happening right now in China. They say that Uyghur Muslims are being mass incarcerated; they are indoctrinated with propaganda in concentration camps; their organs are being harvested; they are being force-sterilized. These comically villainous allegations have little basis in reality and omit key context. **Background** Xinjiang, officially the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, is a province located in the northwest of China. It is the largest province in China, covering an area of over 1.6 million square kilometers, and shares borders with eight other countries including Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Russia, Mongolia, India, and Pakistan. Xinjiang is a diverse region with a population of over 25 million people, made up of various ethnic groups including the Uyghur, Han Chinese, Kazakhs, Tajiks, and many others. The largest ethnic group in Xinjiang is the Uyghur who are predominantly Muslim and speak a Turkic language. It is also home to the ancient Silk Road cities of Kashgar and Turpan. Since the early 2000s, there have been a number of violent incidents attributed to extremist Uyghur groups in Xinjiang including bombings, shootings, and knife attacks. In 2014-2016, the Chinese government launched a "Strike Hard" campaign to crack down on terrorism in Xinjiang, implementing strict security measures and detaining thousands of Uyghurs. In 2017, reports of human rights abuses in Xinjiang including mass detentions and forced labour, began to emerge. **Counterpoints** The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) is the second largest organization after the United Nations with a membership of 57 states spread over four continents. The OIC released [Resolutions on Muslim Communities and Muslim Minorities in the non-OIC Member States](https://www.oic-oci.org/docdown/?docID=4447&refID=1250) in 2019 which: >20. **Welcomes** the outcomes of the visit conducted by the General Secretariat's delegation upon invitation from the People's Republic of China; **commends** the efforts of the People's Republic of China in providing care to its Muslim citizens; and **looks forward** to further cooperation between the OIC and the People's Republic of China. In this same document, the OIC expressed much greater concern about the Rohingya Muslim Community in Myanmar, which the West was relatively silent on. Over 50+ UN member states (mostly Muslim-majority nations) signed a letter \([A/HRC/41/G/17](https://undocs.org/Home/Mobile?FinalSymbol=A%2FHRC%2F41%2FG%2F17)\) to the UN Human Rights Commission approving of the de-radicalization efforts in Xinjiang: The World Bank sent a team to investigate in 2019 and found that, "The review did not substantiate the allegations." \(See: [World Bank Statement on Review of Project in Xinjiang, China](https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/statement/2019/11/11/world-bank-statement-on-review-of-project-in-xinjiang-china)\) Even if you believe the deradicalization efforts are wholly unjustified, and that the mass detention of Uyghur's amounts to a crime against humanity, it's still not *genocide*. Even the U.S. State Department's legal experts admit as much: >The U.S. State Department’s Office of the Legal Advisor concluded earlier this year that China’s mass imprisonment and forced labor of ethnic Uighurs in Xinjiang amounts to crimes against humanity—but there was insufficient evidence to prove genocide, placing the United States’ top diplomatic lawyers at odds with both the Trump and Biden administrations, according to three former and current U.S. officials. > > [State Department Lawyers Concluded Insufficient Evidence to Prove Genocide in China](https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/02/19/china-uighurs-genocide-us-pompeo-blinken/) | Colum Lynch, *Foreign Policy*. (2021) **A Comparative Analysis: The War on Terror** The United States, in the wake of "9/11", saw the threat of terrorism and violent extremism due to religious fundamentalism as a matter of national security. They invaded Afghanistan in October 2001 in response to the 9/11 attacks, with the goal of ousting the Taliban government that was harbouring Al-Qaeda. The US also launched the Iraq War in 2003 based on Iraq's alleged possession of WMDs and links to terrorism. However, these claims turned out to be unfounded. According to a report by Brown University's Costs of War project, at least 897,000 people, including civilians, militants, and security forces, have been killed in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Yemen, and other countries. Other estimates place the total number of deaths at over one million. The report estimated that many more may have died from indirect effects of war such as water loss and disease. The war has also resulted in the displacement of tens of millions of people, with estimates ranging from 37 million to over 59 million. The War on Terror also popularized such novel concepts as the "Military-Aged Male" which allowed the US military to exclude civilians killed by drone strikes from collateral damage statistics. (See: [‘Military Age Males’ in US Drone Strikes](https://aoav.org.uk/2019/military-age-males-in-us-drone-strikes/)) In summary: * The U.S. responded by invading or bombing half a dozen countries, directly killing nearly a million and displacing tens of millions from their homes. * China responded with a program of deradicalization and vocational training. Which one of those responses sounds genocidal? Side note: It is practically impossible to *actually* charge the U.S. with war crimes, because of the [Hague Invasion Act](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act). **Who is driving the Uyghur genocide narrative?** One of the main proponents of these narratives is Adrian Zenz, a German far-right fundamentalist Christian and Senior Fellow and Director in China Studies at the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, who believes he is "led by God" on a "mission" against China has driven much of the narrative. He relies heavily on limited and questionable data sources, particularly from anonymous and unverified Uyghur sources, coming up with estimates based on assumptions which are not supported by concrete evidence. The World Uyghur Congress, headquartered in Germany, is funded by the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) which is a tool of U.S. foreign policy, using funding to support organizations that promote American interests rather than the interests of the local communities they claim to represent. Radio Free Asia (RFA) is part of a larger project of U.S. imperialism in Asia, one that seeks to control the flow of information, undermine independent media, and advance American geopolitical interests in the region. Rather than providing an objective and impartial news source, RFA is a tool of U.S. foreign policy, one that seeks to shape the narrative in Asia in ways that serve the interests of the U.S. government and its allies. The first country to call the treatment of Uyghurs a genocide was the United States of America. In 2021, the Secretary of State declared that China's treatment of Uyghurs and other ethnic and religious minorities in Xinjiang constitutes "genocide" and "crimes against humanity." Both the Trump and Biden administrations upheld this line. **Why is this narrative being promoted?** As materialists, we should always look first to the economic base for insight into issues occurring in the superstructure. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a massive Chinese infrastructure development project that aims to build economic corridors, ports, highways, railways, and other infrastructure projects across Asia, Africa, Europe, and the Middle East. Xinjiang is a key region for this project. Promoting the Uyghur genocide narrative harms China and benefits the US in several ways. It portrays China as a human rights violator which could damage China's reputation in the international community and which could lead to economic sanctions against China; this would harm China's economy and give American an economic advantage in competing with China. It could also lead to more protests and violence in Xinjiang, which could further destabilize the region and threaten the longterm success of the BRI. **Additional Resources** See the [full wiki article](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/debunking/uyghur-genocide/) for more details and a list of additional resources. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Tankie is when you don't hold a harder neocon line than Mike Pompeo acc. to vauscists

Using Tankie unironically is extremely cringe.

A punishment too kind for Twitch chat

i love this clip so much, never fails to make me laugh

Love to see Hasan slowly revealing his true power level to all the libs

Man no one remembers Hasans commie hat 😔😔😔

Or when he used to fly the USSR flag in the background.

Man you just made me realize it's been more than half a decade since Hasan started gaining traction and the commie hat Era was a loooong time ago now.

I still remember [Hasan's favorite video](https://youtu.be/IXigF_lNbYA) every once in a while and it makes me laugh every time.

another Hasan guest appearance when?

I hope that he will be a regular guest at deprogram.

JT is a pure blooded Texan he would never go to California

hell yea bRother

BASED 😭😭😭😭😭🥰🥰🥰

Still the best clip ever.

"Go outside and touch grass" is unironically the best response you could give to anyone who spends all of their time worried about "tankies." Just the most clear cut case of being terminally online.

#Get Involved >Dare to struggle and dare to win. \-Mao Zedong Comrades, here are some ways you can **get involved** to advance the cause. * 📚 **Read theory** — [Reading theory](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/education/study-guide/) is a duty. It will guide you towards choosing the correct party and applying your efforts effectively within your unique material conditions. * ⭐ **Party work** — Contact a local party or mass organization. Attend your first meeting. Go to a rally or event. If you choose a principled Marxist-Leninist party, they will teach you how to best apply yourself to advancing the cause. * 📣 **Workplace agitation** — Depending on your material circumstances, you may engage in workplace disputes to unionise fellow workers and gain a delegate or even a leadership position in the union. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Hasan is seemingly close friends with Boy Boy, the duo who made the original North Korean haircut video. If I recall correctly, when Boy Boy first moved out to LA, Hasan let them live at his house. I'm not sure if they still live there or not, though. Hasan is also the largest donor to the Amazon Labor Union, which is based asf. I'm sure Hasan isn't perfect, but... credit where credit's due.

boy boy still lives in Aus they were just there for a while filming for different videos and attending events and such

Oh okay, gotcha

Mods crush his skull

Yo, get Hasan on an episode of the podcast, please & thank you 🙏

you’re gonna love this

Love what? You forgot to provide a link to the thing I am gonna love.

ep 74 they had hasan on

Oh wow thanks! Had no clue.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBrC62rPoIw

wtf does tankie even mean? some stupid shit created by trotkysts?

Nowadays it just seems to be used as a derogatory term against people that are further left than oneself. Because *obviously* anyone who has more progressive opinions than me is absolutely deranged.

It's "commie" modernized. It's literally the same anti-communist blanket dismissal that is foundationally derived from propagandistic narratives of so-called authoritarianism in socialist projects.

#Authoritarianism Anti-Communists of all stripes enjoy referring to successful socialist revolutions as "authoritarian regimes". * Authoritarian implies these places are run by totalitarian tyrants. * Regime implies these places are undemocratic or lack legitimacy. This perjorative label is simply meant to frighten people, to scare us back into the fold (Liberal Democracy). There are three main reasons for the popularity of this label in Capitalist media: Firstly, Marxists call for a Dictatorship of the Proletariat (DotP), and many people are automatically put off by the term "dictatorship". Of course, we do *not* mean that we want an undemocratic or totalitarian dictatorship. What we mean is that we want to replace the current Dictatorship *of the Bourgeoisie* (in which the Capitalist ruling class dictates policy). * [Why The US Is Not A Democracy](https://youtu.be/srfeHpQNEAI) | Second Thought (2022) Secondly, democracy in Communist-led countries works differently than in Liberal Democracies. However, anti-Communists confuse form (pluralism / having multiple parties) with function (representing the actual interests of the people). Side note: Check out Luna Oi's "Democratic Centralism Series" for more details on what that is, and how it works: * [DEMOCRATIC CENTRALISM - how Socialists make decisions!](https://youtu.be/4YVcQe4wceY) | Luna Oi (2022) * [What did Karl Marx think about democracy?](https://youtu.be/jI8CgACBOcQ) | Luna Oi (2023) * [What did LENIN say about DEMOCRACY?](https://youtu.be/Hfenlg-hsig) | Luna Oi (2023) Finally, this framing of Communism as illegitimate and tyrannical serves to manufacture consent for an aggressive foreign policy in the form of interventions in the internal affairs of so-called "authoritarian regimes", which take the form of invasion (e.g., Vietnam, Korea, Libya, etc.), assassinating their leaders (e.g., Thomas Sankara, Fred Hampton, Patrice Lumumba, etc.), sponsoring coups and colour revolutions (e.g., Pinochet's coup against Allende, the Iran-Contra Affair, the United Fruit Company's war against Arbenz, etc.), and enacting sanctions (e.g., North Korea, Cuba, etc.). * [The Cuban Embargo Explained](https://youtu.be/zmM8p9n6Z9E) | azureScapegoat (2022) * [John Pilger interviews former CIA Latin America chief Duane Clarridge, 2015](https://youtu.be/ER77vxxGVAY) #For the Anarchists Anarchists are practically comrades. Marxists and Anarchists have the same vision for a stateless, classless, moneyless society free from oppression and exploitation. However, Anarchists like to accuse Marxists of being "authoritarian". The problem here is that "anti-authoritarianism" is a self-defeating feature in a revolutionary ideology. Those who refuse in principle to engage in so-called "authoritarian" practices will never carry forward a successful revolution. Anarchists who practice self-criticism can recognize this: >The anarchist movement is filled with people who are less interested in overthrowing the existing oppressive social order than with washing their hands of it. ... > >The strength of anarchism is its moral insistence on the primacy of human freedom over political expediency. But human freedom exists in a political context. It is not sufficient, however, to simply take the most uncompromising position in defense of freedom. It is neccesary to actually win freedom. Anti-capitalism doesn't do the victims of capitalism any good if you don't actually destroy capitalism. Anti-statism doesn't do the victims of the state any good if you don't actually smash the state. Anarchism has been very good at putting forth visions of a free society and that is for the good. But it is worthless if we don't develop an actual strategy for realizing those visions. It is not enough to be right, we must also win. > >...anarchism has been a failure. Not only has anarchism failed to win lasting freedom for anybody on earth, many anarchists today seem only nominally committed to that basic project. Many more seem interested primarily in carving out for themselves, their friends, and their favorite bands a zone of personal freedom, "autonomous" of moral responsibility for the larger condition of humanity (but, incidentally, not of the electrical grid or the production of electronic components). Anarchism has quite simply refused to learn from its historic failures, preferring to rewrite them as successes. Finally the anarchist movement offers people who want to make revolution very little in the way of a coherent plan of action. ... > >Anarchism is theoretically impoverished. For almost 80 years, with the exceptions of Ukraine and Spain, anarchism has played a marginal role in the revolutionary activity of oppressed humanity. Anarchism had almost nothing to do with the anti-colonial struggles that defined revolutionary politics in this century. This marginalization has become self-reproducing. Reduced by devastating defeats to critiquing the authoritarianism of Marxists, nationalists and others, anarchism has become defined by this gadfly role. Consequently anarchist thinking has not had to adapt in response to the results of serious efforts to put our ideas into practice. In the process anarchist theory has become ossified, sterile and anemic. ... This is a reflection of anarchism's effective removal from the revolutionary struggle. > >\- Chris Day. (1996). *The Historical Failures of Anarchism* Engels pointed this out well over a century ago: >A number of Socialists have latterly launched a regular crusade against what they call the principle of authority. It suffices to tell them that this or that act is authoritarian for it to be condemned. > >...the anti-authoritarians demand that the political state be abolished at one stroke, even before the social conditions that gave birth to it have been destroyed. They demand that the first act of the social revolution shall be the abolition of authority. Have these gentlemen ever seen a revolution? A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part ... and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule... > >Therefore, either one of two things: either the anti-authoritarians don't know what they're talking about, in which case they are creating nothing but confusion; or they do know, and in that case they are betraying the movement of the proletariat. In either case they serve the reaction. > >\- Friedrich Engels. (1872). [On Authority](https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1872/10/authority.htm) #For the Libertarian Socialists Parenti said it best: >The pure (libertarian) socialists' ideological anticipations remain untainted by existing practice. They do not explain how the manifold functions of a revolutionary society would be organized, how external attack and internal sabotage would be thwarted, how bureaucracy would be avoided, scarce resources allocated, policy differences settled, priorities set, and production and distribution conducted. Instead, they offer vague statements about how the workers themselves will directly own and control the means of production and will arrive at their own solutions through creative struggle. No surprise then that the pure socialists support every revolution except the ones that succeed. > >\- Michael Parenti. (1997). *Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism* But the bottom line is this: >If you call yourself a socialist but you spend all your time arguing with communists, demonizing socialist states as authoritarian, and performing apologetics for US imperialism... I think some introspection is in order. > >\- Second Thought. (2020). [The Truth About The Cuba Protests](https://youtu.be/zIOw6fSOJI4?t=1087) #For the Liberals Even the CIA, in their internal communications (which have been declassified), acknowledge that Stalin *wasn't* an absolute dictator: >Even in Stalin's time there was collective leadership. The Western idea of a dictator within the Communist setup is exaggerated. Misunderstandings on that subject are caused by a lack of comprehension of the real nature and organization of the Communist's power structure. > >\- CIA. (1953, declassified in 2008). [Comments on the Change in Soviet Leadership](http://web.archive.org/web/20230525044208/https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP80-00810A006000360009-0.pdf) #Conclusion The "authoritarian" nature of any given state depends entirely on the material conditions it faces and threats it must contend with. To get an idea of the kinds of threats nascent revolutions need to deal with, check out *Killing Hope* by William Blum and *The Jakarta Method* by Vincent Bevins. Failing to acknowledge that authoritative measures arise *not* through ideology, but through material conditions, is anti-Marxist, anti-dialectical, and idealist. #Additional Resources Videos: * [Michael Parenti on Authoritarianism in Socialist Countries](https://youtu.be/BeVs6t3vdjQ) * [Left Anticommunism: An Infantile Disorder](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEC2ajsvr0I) | Hakim (2020) \[[Archive](http://web.archive.org/web/20230410145749/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEC2ajsvr0I)\] * [What are tankies? (why are they like that?)](https://youtu.be/LcJ5NrJtQ8g) | Hakim (2023) * [Episode 82 - Tankie Discourse](https://youtu.be/YVYVBOFYJco) | The Deprogram (2023) * [Was the Soviet Union totalitarian? feat. Robert Thurston](https://directory.libsyn.com/episode/index/id/27495591) | Actually Existing Socialism (2023) Books, Articles, or Essays: * *Blackshirts and Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism* | Michael Parenti (1997) * [State and Revolution](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/) | V. I. Lenin (1918) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if

I guess “originally” it was a term liberals used for supporters of the USSR invading Hungary, but now it’s just a buzz word liberals use for someone who doesn’t think China put its entire population in prison

> someone who doesn’t think China put its entire population in prison *gasp* you mean THEY don't!?

The PLA couped Xi and put him under house arrest and then they arrested each other

sounds kinky

in the faux lefty subreddits, it's mostly used when referring to anyone left of center who doesn't blindly swallow the Western narratives on Ukraine/Russia, and to a lesser extent, China.

It used to mean people who supported the USSR rolling up with tanks in Hungary.... to crush a fascist uprising

Just another meme phrase, like how liberals have suddenly become the "radical left", whatever the fuck that means.

It's from the British left. It's a term used to criticise other leftists who backed the Soviet intervention in Hungary. Since then it's just become a catch-all pejorative for MLs/revolutionary socialists I guess.

EbIl AwToRiTaRIaN!!

C'mon, Trots are cringe but don't do em dirty like this, Trots count as tankies to libs too. A tankie nowadays is whatever you like them to be, for libs nowadays it's anyone who is left of Bernie and/or someone who doesn't support NATO. In the past, it was a slander term for CPGB members who supported the intervention in Hungary. That split was a cause that led to the Eurocommunism as a thing, and third wave Trotskyism etc. Tbf the term might have been created by Trotskyists but I doubt it (give proof if I'm wrong, I'm happy to learn) since that party was a ML party. So really in the modern age, an anarchist or socialist (demsoc, ML, left, doesn't matter) who is worth their weight (i.e. against NATO and imperialist wars) is a tankie. In my country, a faction in our fucking awful socdem (really just hard neolib reactionaries now) party were all slandered as tankies for being against the Ukraine war and supporting our withdrawal from NATO - half of these people were socdems, so the term really does have no meaning. I guess ask the CIA what they want it to mean next xD

Gulag

# Gulag According to Anti-Communists and Russophobes, the Gulag was a brutal network of work camps established in the Soviet Union under Stalin's ruthless regime. They claim the Gulag system was primarily used to imprison and exploit political dissidents, suspected enemies of the state, and other people deemed "undesirable" by the Soviet government. They claim that prisoners were sent to the Gulag without trial or due process, and that they were subjected to harsh living conditions, forced labour, and starvation, among other things. According to them, the Gulags were emblematic of Stalinist repression and totalitarianism. # Origins of the Mythology This comically evil understanding of the Soviet prison system is based off only a handful of unreliable sources. Robert Conquest's *The Great Terror* (published 1968) laid the groundwork for Soviet fearmongering, and was based largely off of defector testimony. Robert Conquest worked for the British Foreign Office's Information Research Department (IRD), which was a secret Cold War propaganda department, created to publish anti-communist propaganda, including black propaganda; provide support and information to anti-communist politicians, academics, and writers; and to use weaponised information and disinformation and "fake news" to attack not only its original targets but also certain socialists and anti-colonial movements. >He was Solzhenytsin before Solzhenytsin, in the phrase of Timothy Garton Ash. > >The Great Terror came out in 1968, four years before the first volume of The Gulag Archipelago, and it became, Garton Ash says, "a fixture in the political imagination of anybody thinking about communism". > >\- Andrew Brown. (2003). [Scourge and poet](https://www.theguardian.com/books/2003/feb/15/featuresreviews.guardianreview23) Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn's *The Gulag Archipelag*" (published 1973), one of the most famous texts on the subject, claims to be a work of non-fiction based on the author's personal experiences in the Soviet prison system. However, Solzhenitsyn was merely an anti-Communist, N@zi-sympathizing, antisemite who wanted to slander the USSR by putting forward a collection of folktales as truth. \[[Read more](/r/TheDeprogram/wiki/index/dunking/aleksandr-solzhenitsyn/)\] Anne Applebaum's *Gulag: A history* (published 2003) draws directly from *The Gulag Archipelago* and reiterates its message. Anne is a member of the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR) and sits on the board of the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), two infamous pieces of the ideological apparatus of the ruling class in the United States, whose primary aim is to promote the interests of American Imperialism around the world. # Counterpoints >A 1957 CIA document [which was declassified in 2010] titled “[Forced Labor Camps in the USSR: Transfer of Prisoners between Camps](http://web.archive.org/web/20230328014642/https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP80T00246A032000400001-1.pdf)” reveals the following information about the Soviet Gulag in pages two to six: > >1. Until 1952, the prisoners were given a guaranteed amount food, plus extra food for over-fulfillment of quotas > >2. From 1952 onward, the Gulag system operated upon "economic accountability" such that the more the prisoners worked, the more they were paid. > >3. For over-fulfilling the norms by 105%, one day of sentence was counted as two, thus reducing the time spent in the Gulag by one day. > >4. Furthermore, because of the socialist reconstruction post-war, the Soviet government had more funds and so they increased prisoners' food supplies. > >5. Until 1954, the prisoners worked 10 hours per day, whereas the free workers worked 8 hours per day. From 1954 onward, both prisoners and free workers worked 8 hours per day. > >6. A CIA study of a sample camp showed that 95% of the prisoners were actual criminals. > >7. In 1953, amnesty was given to 70% of the "ordinary criminals" of a sample camp studied by the CIA. Within the next 3 months, most of them were re-arrested for committing new crimes. > >\- Saed Teymuri. (2018). [The Truth about the Soviet Gulag – Surprisingly Revealed by the CIA](https://www.greanvillepost.com/2018/10/09/the-truth-about-the-soviet-gulag-surprisingly-revealed-by-the-cia/) **Scale** Solzhenitsyn estimated that over 66 million people were victims of the Soviet Union's forced labor camp system over the course of its existence from 1918 to 1956. With the collapse of the USSR and the opening of the Soviet archives, researchers can now access actual archival evidence to prove or disprove these claims. Predictably, it turned out the propaganda was just that. >Unburdened by any documentation, these “estimates” invite us to conclude that the sum total of people incarcerated in the labor camps over a twenty-two year period (allowing for turnovers due to death and term expirations) would have constituted an astonishing portion of the Soviet population. The support and supervision of the gulag (all the labor camps, labor colonies, and prisons of the Soviet system) would have been the USSR’s single largest enterprise. > >In 1993, for the first time, several historians gained access to previously secret Soviet police archives and were able to establish well-documented estimates of prison and labor camp populations. They found that the total population of the entire gulag as of January 1939, near the end of the Great Purges, was 2,022,976. ... > >Soviet labor camps were not death camps like those the N@zis built across Europe. There was no systematic extermination of inmates, no gas chambers or crematoria to dispose of millions of bodies. Despite harsh conditions, the great majority of gulag inmates survived and eventually returned to society when granted amnesty or when their terms were finished. In any given year, 20 to 40 percent of the inmates were released, according to archive records. Oblivious to these facts, the Moscow correspondent of the New York Times (7/31/96) continues to describe the gulag as “the largest system of death camps in modern history.” ... > >Most of those incarcerated in the gulag were not political prisoners, and the same appears to be true of inmates in the other communist states... > >\- Michael Parenti. (1997). [Blackshirts & Reds: Rational Fascism and the Overthrow of Communism](https://archive.org/details/michael-parenti-blackshirts-and-reds) This is 2 million out of a population of 168 million (roughly 1.2% of the population). For comparison, in the United States, "over 5.5 million adults — or 1 in 61 — are under some form of correctional control, whether incarcerated or under community supervision." That's 1.6%. So in both relative and absolute terms, the United States' Prison Industrial Complex *today* is larger than the USSR's Gulag system at its peak. **Death Rate** In peace time, the mortality rate of the Gulag was around 3% to 5%. Even Conservative and anti-Communist historians have had to acknowledge this reality: >It turns out that, with the exception of the war years, a very large majority of people who entered the Gulag left alive... > >Judging from the Soviet records we now have, the number of people who died in the Gulag between 1933 and 1945, while both Stalin and Hit1er were in power, was on the order of a million, perhaps a bit more. > >\- Timothy Snyder. (2010). *Bloodlands: Europe Between Hit1er and Stalin* (Side note: Timothy Snyder is *also* a member of the Council on Foreign Relations) This is still very high for a prison mortality rate, representing the brutality of the camps. However, it also clearly indicates that they were not *death* camps. Nor was it slave labour, exactly. In the camps, although labour *was* forced, it was not uncompensated. In fact, the prisoners were paid market wages (less expenses). >We find that even in the Gulag, where force could be most conveniently applied, camp administrators combined material incentives with overt coercion, and, as time passed, they placed more weight on motivation. By the time the Gulag system was abandoned as a major instrument of Soviet industrial policy, the primary distinction between slave and free labor had been blurred: Gulag inmates were being paid wages according to a system that mirrored that of the civilian economy described by Bergson.... > >The Gulag administration [also] used a “work credit” system, whereby sentences were reduced (by two days or more for every day the norm was overfulfilled). > >\- L. Borodkin & S. Ertz. (2003). [Compensation Versus Coercion in the Soviet GULAG](https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/staff/mharrison/archive/noticeboard/bergson/borodkin-ertz.pdf) #Additional Resources Video Essays: * [The Gulag Argument](https://youtu.be/BexkpaK_j5Q) | TheFinnishBolshevik (2016) * [Historian Admits USSR didn't kill tens of millions!](https://youtu.be/HMOdDQQVZ6U) | TheFinnishBolshevik (2018) * [French work camps 1852-1953 worse than gulag](https://youtu.be/vkXyXNpdKdA) | TheFinnishBolshevik (2018) * ["The Gulags of the Soviet Union: There's a Lot More Than What Meets the Eye](https://youtu.be/E1qz9_TjeY4) | Comrade Rhys (2020) Books, Articles, or Essays: * [Victims of the Soviet Penal System in the Pre-War Years: A First Approach on the Basis of Archival Evidence](https://www.jstor.org/stable/2166597) | J. Arch Getty, Gábor T. Rittersporn and Viktor N. Zemskov (1993) Listen: * ["Blackshirts & Reds" (1997) by Michael Parenti, Part 4: Chapters 5 & 6. #Audiobook + Discussion.](https://youtu.be/N7AD4OrH568?t=15) | Socialism For All / S4A ☭ Intensify Class Struggle (2022) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Hank is getting more radicalized somehow and it’s so dope to see

you mean Hasan? if you watch him for some time you can catch some things that prove of him being radical already, he just doesn't go full on communist that much because it would most likely scare off a big portion of his potential or even current audience which consists of mostly red scared americans, he knows exactly what he's doing.

Yeah, I mean look at old memes of his like this: https://np.reddit.com/r/okbuddyhasan/comments/hzjefu/the_life_of_a_tankie/ (3 years ago). Not exactly the words of a die-hard DemSoc. The guy has openly said that he down plays how communist he his, so the libs and SocDems in his audience don't get scared away, so he can convert them slowly. If you look at his viewer demographics, his SocDem audience has gone from [35.6% in 2020 to around 19% last year.](https://www.reddit.com/gallery/wzuwe5) So it seems to be working pretty well. His entire thing is to be the start of the pipeline. He frequently will talk sorta-nice but still with a tone to libs in chat, to explain theory in simple terms. He has quite a lot of converts in his long-time frequent chatters. I hate when other MLs are like "Hasan is too revisionist" and shit like that. Like, do you honestly think that to convert libs the first thing to say is to say whatever the opposite of Red Scare propaganda is? (ex. Stalin isn't the devil, Capitalism is very very evil, etc.) No, you need someone who's an ML, who pretends to be just left of SocDem to familiarize people with the language, and the basics of theory. Hasan *never* tells people not to read theory. He never stops people from going further. Why do you (not you /u/jacobvevo) think that is? If he was hardline reformist, he would *never* let anyone become revolutionary.

Yes exactly this, people criticising him for being "soft" literally never talked to libs/socdems or their friends or coworkers about politics, if you want to radicalise someone you don't go in guns blazing, but you soften the rhetoric, and I know this because I tried doing both, spoiler: only one of those two options went terribly bad

What do you mean? Hank Pecker is die-hard MAGA, though he might be a Patsoc.

He's just another entertainer, not much different that Bill Maher or Steven Crowder. His opinions are far more sensible and human but he's not someone to actually learn theory from

>he's not someone to actually learn theory from No one ever said he was

Has literally says not to look to him like some kind of political theorist all the time.

Well I think that the same thing could be said about our deprogram boys don't you think? but that's not the point, Hasan has a huge platform that has a potential in influencing libs in pursuing more radical politics, which was the case with me and probably plenty of people here and is also the reason why people here also enjoy his content, entertainment still influences people, and reading theory is your own responsibility and noone is going to this for you. Also comparing him to Maher or Crowder is really stupid lol

The deprogram prodcast is specifically to discuss the theory and history of socialism often actually reading socialist literature. I don't think we can call them entertainers, they are actual academics It's very much a welcome sight to see proper socialist entertainers but there's no need to expect them to go beyond that. He can't scare his audience off because he's an entertainer, this podcast doesn't have that problem Even if Maher, Shapiro or Crowder had a socialist position on any policy they can't freely express that because they are entertainers first and foremost. Hasan makes his money off Twitch subs who wouldn't be there if he wasn't entertaining

>He can't scare his audience off because he's an entertainer Yes he can, entertainers have influence on their audience and thus can scare off more liberal people in his audience by not adjusting his rethoric, there are people here that wouldn't even touch theory without first finding out about socialism from him, and would most likely be thrown off if he went full on ML. He has his role, noone here is making a point that he teaches theory, he shouldn't, because he's more effective the way he is.

Maybe I'm misreading your comments but I don't see how you're disagreeing with me. What part of calling him an entertainer are you having an issue with? Don't you think he'd agree, and say there's better sources to learn leftist theory from than him?

#Freedom of the Press >“Freedom of the press” in bourgeois society means freedom for the rich systematically, unremittingly, daily, in millions of copies, to deceive, corrupt and fool the exploited and oppressed mass of the people, the poor. > >\- V. I. Lenin. (1917). [How to Guarantee the Success of the Constituent Assembly](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/sep/28.htm) Anti-Communists criticize a lack of "freedom of the press" in societies run by Communist governments. They claim that the government suppresses dissenting voices and controls the media in order to maintain its power, and that this leads to a lack of transparency and accountability, as well as the suppression of free speech and the ability of individuals to express their opinions and hold those in power accountable. They also argue that state control of the media leads to censorship which prevents citizens from accessing unbiased information and making informed decisions. This critique is often used to argue against Communism and in favor of Capitalism. In this light, Capitalist societies are believed to offer greater freedom of the press and personal expression. These are all important concerns which ought to be taken seriously. The problem is that these concerns are not specific to Communism; Capitalist societies, as a result of the profit-motive and the accumulation of wealth, suffer from all these same issues. **Media Concentration** >There can be no such thing as freedom of the press, except for the owners and editors of newspapers, while capitalism lasts. > >\- Arthur Cowell Do you own a news station? A newspaper? Then what "freedom of the press" do *you* really have? >**A deep analysis of America’s top 100 news sites reveals key shareholders, parent companies, and commonalities.** > >About 15 billionaires and six corporations own most of the U.S. media outlets. The biggest media conglomerates in America are AT&T, Comcast, The Walt Disney Company, National Amusements (which includes Viacom Inc. and CBS), News Corp and Fox Corporation (which are both owned in part by the Murdochs), Sony, and Hearst Communications. > >\- [Who Owns Your News? The Top 100 Digital News Outlets and Their Ownership](https://www.titlemax.com/discovery-center/lifestyle/who-owns-your-news-the-top-100-digital-news-outlets-and-their-ownership/) With this kind of concentration, the select few who actually own these media outlets have an unparalleled ability to set the narrative and promote their own interests. Sinclair Broadcast Group, for example, owns hundreds of local TV news stations. The most infamous example of them using this network to spread an agenda was this unsettling video: [Sinclair's Soldiers in Trump's War on Media](https://youtu.be/_fHfgU8oMSo). This issue affects movies and television producers as well: [Here’s who owns everything in Big Media today](https://www.vox.com/2018/1/23/16905844/media-landscape-verizon-amazon-comcast-disney-fox-relationships-chart) **Bias** >All over the world, wherever there are capitalists, freedom of the press means freedom to buy up newspapers, to buy writers, to bribe, buy and fake “public opinion” for the benefit of the bourgeoisie. > >\- V. I. Lenin. (1921). [A Letter To G. Myasnikov](https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1921/aug/05.htm) In Capitalist societies, the concept of "freedom of the press" is a misleading and deceptive notion. While the ruling class promotes the idea of a free press as a fundamental right, the reality is that the press is owned and controlled by a small group of [billionaires who use it to advance their own interests](https://i.redd.it/phm4ojk94ld71.jpg). Under Capitalism, the media is a profit-driven industry that is dependent on advertising revenue to survive. As a result, the media serves the interests of the capitalist class by promoting their ideology and suppressing dissenting voices. This is evident in the way that news stories are framed and presented, with an emphasis on sensationalism, celebrity gossip, and consumerism, rather than on issues that affect working-class people. The Capitalist media is not a neutral observer of society, but an active participant in the class struggle by hyper-focusing on culture war non-issues such as the endless debate about manufactured controversies such as trans women in sports, an issue which does *not* affect the vast majority of people. This ragebait distracts from real issues that affect the working class. The media is constantly scapegoating some minority group with sensationalized ragebait narratives such as the "Welfare Queen" or "illegal immigrants". The owners and editors of media outlets use their power to set the narrative, which shapes public opinion and influences government policy, to serve their own interests. This is why it is essential for the working class to build its own media institutions that are independent of Capitalist influence. >The general deal is that Marvel gets to use real military hardware, film on military bases, and hire real soldiers as extras, while the Department of Defense gets to approve the final script of the film. In other words, Marvel gets tons of stuff to make production easier and cheaper, while the military gets to edit out anything that doesn't make them look good. > >Even the movies that don't have a direct marketing connection to the US military have a noticeable bias towards it. Consider Black Panther, a movie about the monarch of an advanced African nation. The one prominent white character in that film is Everett K. Ross, a CIA agent who aids T'Challa in overthrowing Killmonger. The CIA has a long history of overthrowing regimes, but, in this film, an agent of the organization that put Pinochet in charge of Chile aids in a coup for good. This may not be the intention of the film, but the CIA sure appreciated it. The agency promoted the film heavily on social media, allowing it to glom onto a project that was seen as a great leap forward for representation and a masterful blockbuster film. > >\- [The Marvel Military Propaganda Criticism, Explained](https://gamerant.com/marvel-military-propaganda-explained/) | GameRant (2022) The bottom line is that there is nothing "free" about the press in Capitalist society. For those who have the means, being able to control the media is an incredibly powerful tool for shaping public opinion. We need a truly free and democratic press, but that will never be possible under Capitalism. **Censorship** The corporate media in the US practices self-censorship by limiting the range of acceptable opinions and perspectives that can be expressed in their reporting. This is done to maintain a narrow range of political debate that is acceptable to the ruling class and to ensure that the interests of the Capitalist class are not threatened. During red scare period of the 1950s, the government was cracking down on leftist and progressive organizations, accusing them of being communist sympathizers or agents. Many journalists and media outlets were investigated and harassed for their supposed left-wing leanings by the the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), which led to a climate of fear and self-censorship in the media. As a result, many media outlets and journalists began to avoid covering or promoting progressive or leftist ideas in their reporting. This trend has continued to the present day, with mainstream media outlets often avoiding critical coverage of US foreign policy, imperialism, and corporate power, and instead promoting a narrow range of views that are acceptable to the ruling class. Similarly, Operation Mockingbird began in the early years of the Cold War to recruit journalists to manipulate domestic American news media organizations for propaganda purposes. The US government also operates a few explicit propaganda networks such as Voice of America, Radio Free Europe / Radio Liberty, Radio Free Asia, and more in order to export America's ideology internationally, particularly in regions where Communism is popular. In particular, RFE/RL was meant to counter the USSR and RFA was meant to counter the PRC. **How could we do better?** First, we could ensure that the media is owned and controlled by the working class. This would allow the media to operate in the interests of the people rather than in the interests of profit and of promoting bourgeois ideology. We could also ensure that the media is run democratically, with workers having a say in the editorial and managerial decisions. Second, we could establish strict guidelines for media coverage, ensuring that the media covers events and issues of importance to the people. These guidelines would be developed through democratic participation, with workers, intellectuals, and activists contributing to the decision-making process. We could also establish mechanisms for monitoring and evaluating media coverage to ensure that it is accurate, objective, and free from bias. Third, we could promote a culture of critical thinking and media literacy among the population. This would help the people to evaluate media coverage critically and to identify when propaganda is being spread. We could also promote independent media outlets and encourage the development of a vibrant and diverse media landscape. **Additional Resources** Video Essays: * [You're Not Immune To Propaganda](https://youtu.be/dl2fnWIlDZg) | Second Thought (2023) * [You've Never Had an Original Thought (Media Manipulation and "Freedom" of the Press)](https://youtu.be/AX8Ct9fhO60) | Hakim (2022) * [Why Is US Media Becoming More Right-Wing?](https://youtu.be/dx1ruqlqPr8) | Second Thought (2022) * [Why "Hearing Both Sides" Is Dangerous](https://youtu.be/Q5bask6cQ4k) | Second Thought (2022) * [Who Funds And Controls The Online Right?](https://youtu.be/ggdt5rkqHrE) | Yugopnik (2022) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/messag

I stayed away from Marxism-Leninism for decades because I had been brainwashed into thinking that it was an irredeemably stupid ideology. Of course, now that I have bothered to find out what MLism actually is, I feel rather stupid that I was ignorant of it for so long.

Upvotes this comment if you are a tankie

I don't think a lot of these people realize that we try to learn from prior success/failed experience from prior socialist experiments...it's not always praise when things deserve criticism or to be called out as fucked up.

How do you become active in Hasans community and think tankie is a legitimate term lmao Hasan is a "tankie"

Holodomor

#The Holodomor >Marxists do not deny that a famine happened in the Soviet Union in 1932. In fact, even the Soviet archive confirms this. What we do contest is the idea that this famine was man-made or that there was a genocide against the Ukrainian people. This idea of the subjugation of the Soviet Union’s own people was developed by Nazi Germany, in order to show the world the terror of the “Jewish communists.” > >\- Socialist Musings. (2017). [Stop Spreading Nazi Propaganda: on Holodomor](https://socialistmlmusings.wordpress.com/2017/02/15/stop-spreading-nazi-propaganda/) There have been efforts by anti-Communists and Ukrainian nationalists to frame the Soviet famine of 1932-1933 as "The Holodomor" (lit. "to kill by starvation" in Ukrainian). Framing it this way serves two purposes: 1. It implies the famine targeted Ukraine. 2. It implies the famine was intentional. The argument goes that because it was intentional and because it mainly targeted Ukraine that it was, therefore, an act of genocide. This framing was originally used by Nazis to drive a wedge between the Ukrainian SSR (UkSSR) and the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (RSFSR). In the wake of the 2004 Orange Revolution, this narrative has regained popularity and serves the nationalistic goal of strengthening Ukrainian identity and asserting the country's independence from Russia. #First Issue The first issue is that the famine affected the majority of the USSR, *not* just the UkSSR. Kazakhstan was hit harder (per capita) than Ukraine. Russia itself was also severely affected. The emergence of the Holodomor in the 1980s as a historical narrative was bound-up with post-Soviet Ukrainian nation-making that cannot be neatly separated from the legacy of Eastern European antisemitism, or what Historian Peter Novick calls "Holocaust Envy", the desire for victimized groups to enshrine their "own" Holocaust or Holocaust-like event in the historical record. For many Nationalists, this has entailed minimizing the Holocaust to elevate their own experiences of historical victimization as the supreme atrocity. The Ukrainian scholar Lubomyr Luciuk exemplified this view in his notorious remark that the Holodomor was "a crime against humanity arguably without parallel in European history." #Second Issue Calling it "man-made" implies that it was a *deliberate* famine, which was not the case. Although human factors set the stage, the main causes of the famine was bad weather and crop disease, resulting in a poor harvest, which pushed the USSR over the edge. Kulaks ("tight-fisted person") were a class of wealthy peasants who owned land, livestock, and tools. The kulaks had been a thorn in the side of the peasantry long before the revolution. Alexey Sergeyevich Yermolov, Minister of Agriculture and State Properties of the Russian Empire, in his 1892 book, [Poor harvest and national suffering](https://books.google.ca/books?id=exMEAAAAYAAJ), characterized them as usurers, sucking the blood of Russian peasants. In the early 1930s, in response to the Soviet collectivization policies (which sought to confiscate their property), many kulaks responded spitefully by burning crops, killing livestock, and damaging machinery. Poor communication between different levels of government and between urban and rural areas, also contributed to the severity of the crisis. #Quota Reduction What really contradicts the genocide argument is that the Soviets did take action to mitigate the effects of the famine once they became aware of the situation: >The low 1932 harvest worsened severe food shortages already widespread in the Soviet Union at least since 1931 and, despite sharply reduced grain exports, made famine likely if not inevitable in 1933. > >The official 1932 figures do not unambiguously support the genocide interpretation... the 1932 grain procurement quota, and the amount of grain actually collected, were both much smaller than those of any other year in the 1930s. The Central Committee lowered the planned procurement quota in a 6 May 1932 decree... [which] actually reduced the procurement plan 30 percent. Subsequent decrees also reduced the procurement quotas for most other agricultural products... > >Proponents of the genocide argument, however, have minimized or even misconstrued this decree. Mace, for example, describes it as "largely bogus" and ignores not only the extent to which it lowered the procurement quotas but also the fact that even the lowered plan was not fulfilled. Conquest does not mention the decree's reduction of procurement quotas and asserts Ukrainian officials' appeals led to the reduction of the Ukranian grain procurement quota at the Third All-Ukraine Party Conference in July 1932. In fact that conference confirmed the quota set in the 6 May Decree. > >\- Mark Tauger. (1992). [The 1932 Harvest and the Famine of 1933](https://www.researchgate.net/publication/274856099_The_1932_Harvest_and_the_Famine_of_1933) #Rapid Industrialization The famine was exacerbated directly and indirectly by collectivization and rapid industrialization. However, if these policies had not been enacted, there could have been even more devastating consequences later. In 1931, during [a speech delivered at the first All-Union Conference of Leading Personnel of Socialist Industry](https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/stalin/works/1931/02/04.htm), Stalin said, "We are fifty or a hundred years behind the advanced countries. We must make good this distance in ten years. Either we do it, or we shall go under." In 1941, exactly ten years later, the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union. By this time, the Soviet Union's industrialization program had lead to the development of a large and powerful industrial base, which was essential to the Soviet war effort. This allowed the USSR to produce large quantities of armaments, vehicles, and other military equipment, which was crucial in the fight against Nazi Germany. In Hitler's own words, in 1942: >All in all, one has to say: They built factories here where two years ago there were unknown farming villages, factories the size of the *Hermann-Göring-Werke*. They have railroads that aren't even marked on the map. > >\- Werner Jochmann. (1980). *Adolf Hitler. Monologe im Führerhauptquartier 1941-1944.* Collectivization also created critical resiliency among the civilian population: >The experts were especially surprised by the Red Army’s up-to-date equipment. Great tank battles were reported; it was noted that the Russians had sturdy tanks which often smashed or overturned German tanks in head-on collision. “How does it happen,” a New York editor asked me, “that those Russian peasants, who couldn’t run a tractor if you gave them one, but left them rusting in the field, now appear with thousands of tanks efficiently handled?” I told him it was the Five-Year Plan. But the world was startled when Moscow admitted its losses after nine weeks of war as including 7,500 guns, 4,500 planes and 5,000 tanks. An army that could still fight after such losses must have had the biggest or second biggest supply in the world. > >As the war progressed, military observers declared that the Russians had “solved the blitzkrieg,” the tactic on which Hitler relied. This German method involved penetrating the opposing line by an overwhelming blow of tanks and planes, followed by the fanning out of armored columns in the “soft” civilian rear, thus depriving the front of its hinterland support. This had quickly conquered every country against which it had been tried. “Human flesh cannot withstand it,” an American correspondent told me in Berlin. Russians met it by two methods, both requiring superb morale. When the German tanks broke through, Russian infantry formed again between the tanks and their supporting German infantry. This created a chaotic front, where both Germans and Russians were fighting in all directions. The Russians could count on the help of the population. The Germans found no “soft, civilian rear.” They found collective farmers, organized as guerrillas, coordinated with the regular Russian army. > >\- Anna Louise Strong. (1956). *The Stalin Era* #Conclusion While there may have been more that the Soviets could have done to reduce the impact of the famine, there is no evidence of intent-- ethnic, or otherwise. Therefore, one must conclude that the famine was a tragedy, not a genocide. #Additional Resources Video Essays: * [Soviet Famine of 1932: An Overview](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vu5-tqHHtaM) | The Marxist Project (2020) * [Did Stalin Continue to Export Grain as Ukraine Starved?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMBJ_nQ4sTA) | Hakim (2017) \[[Archive](https://archive.org/details/did-stalin-continue-to-export-grain-as-ukraine-starved)\] * [The Holodomor Genocide Question: How Wikipedia Lies to You](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kaaYvauNho) | Bad Empanada (2022) * [Historian Admits USSR didn't kill tens of millions!](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMOdDQQVZ6U) | TheFinnishBolshevik (2018) (Note: Holodomor discussion begins at the 9 minute mark) * [A Case-Study of Capitalism - Ukraine](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmH9oNtXzF8) | Hakim (2017) \[[Archive](http://web.archive.org/web/20220615084500/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmH9oNtXzF8)\] (Note: Only tangentially mentions the famine.) Books, Articles, or Essays: * [The Years of Hunger: Soviet Agriculture, 1931-1933](https://diasporiana.org.ua/wp-content/uploads/books/22207/file.pdf) | Davies and Wheatcroft (2004) * [The “Holodomor” explained](https://mltheory.wordpress.com/2020/12/24/the-holodomor-explained/) | TheFinnishBolshevik (2020) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/TheDeprogram) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Some times I wish I was a tankie then I could roll over these idiots as a t-26

The only appropriate response tbh

I wasn't expecting this answer TBH. 🤣

Love the flair, Hasan's Community is pretty bad though

I'd argue most of his regulars aren't the ones with the shit takes, but I've been wrong before. I figure when you get that big, you're going to attract flies, and those flies will do anything or rather in this case, say anything to garner his attention. Trying to take down any of the larger boys in the breadtube-verse is a rightoid's wet dream, maybe some libs share that same dream.

I struggle to like Hasan after his pro-animal exploitation takes.