I forgot to set a reminder so I’m a little late getting to this, but here we are again:
Are you a “tankie”?
Respond “yes” or “no”, I’ll collate results later
This process is being undertaken to determine if so-called “tankies” are conspiring to make you (yes, you) have a bad time on the internet!
vague or informal answers will be interpreted by the central authority (me). Only top level comments will be counted. I will not be providing further instructions or clarifications.
🤯
Link to previous results (very serious) hexbear / lemmy,ml
Link to previous “are you a tankie?” thread
I’ll likely check back in a week, my old pc died so itll take a little bit of time to prettify the results and write a report
Ciao, and of course, imperialism must be destroyed.
Tankie is when a third worlder socialist shares the most Milquetoast leftist opinion.
Aigh’t, while i don’t believe in the premise of communism in human civilisation, i think socialism, without it getting over the freedom of people, is one of the way to ensure the future of humanity.
I believe a balanced amount of anarchism and socialism can, for a medium sized population, be good and sustainable on the long run.
Tho to be honest, i don’t know enough in politics to say an answer.
“Tankies” don’t exist.
People who unironically use the word “tankie” would say it’s someone who uncritically supports communist governments, but if you ever look at someone using it, it’s always because they are uncritically against all communist governments and so they interpret nuance or historical understanding as blind loyalty to communism.
no
I don’t know enough about what happened in Hungary to even form an opinion on it and it isn’t at all relevant to today. But I do have actual principles and oppose imperialism, so other instances will say so anyway.
Tankie is a pretty cool sounding word, so yes.
yes
I’m a liberal. I know the power that democracy bestows: vote.
Fighting fascism? Vote hard.
Fighting genocide? Vote harder.
Fighting cancer? You guessed it, just vote.
Vote solves everything, vote is beautiful.
Yes.
That answer is only for my own country America, I do not have strong opinions for other areas and countries.
And I realize the term is broad, and gives connotations I do not intend.
A socialist movement that is backed by force, and not using democratic methods, would save far more lives than it would destroy.
Americans do not understand democracy because they do not understand, at a fundamental level, that ballot counts need to be witnessed and recounts always allowed.
They cannot be taught that. This removes reform by democracy.
But when reform is imposed on by force there are many who would disagree . So the revolution would need to defend itself. That means time and time again, this would happen repeatedly. And the cost would be horrible.
Of course my preferred solution would raise new problems, and a rise of a new elite would have to countered, and history shows that is hard. But I think because tens of millions of Americans will die if this revolution not happen, then it’s worth it
“In many cases, to avoid conflict is to prolong suffering”
-Ture
I’m a moderate and believe in supporting the lesser of two evils, which means critical support for enemies of US imperialism. I’m also something of a centrist because I believe anarchists and Marxist-Leninists and other left tendencies all have good ideas.
So yeah, I’m a moderate centrist.
😂
Yes
(Or at least I hope so lol)
In that “tankie” is just a pejorative for a communist, yes. I’m a Marxist-Leninist, and I uphold AES as legitimate.
Workers of the world, unite! ☭
For those who don’t know what a “tankie” is, it’s essentially a pejorative for “communist.” I recommend the Prolewiki article on “Tankies,” as well as Nia Frome’s essay “Tankies.”
For those that want an introduction to Marxism-Leninism, I made an introductory Marxist-Leninist reading list, check it out!
What is AES in this context? I’m pretty sure it’s not encryption or a corporation lol
Actually Existing Socialism, countries like the PRC, Cuba, DPRK, Vietnam, Laos, former USSR, etc.
Oh god oh fuck I’m the type of commie that isn’t obsessed with millitary equipment I didn’t study oh god oh fuck
Tankie is a pejorative for authoritarians that advocate violence to further their political aims. The particular ideology is just window dressing.
18·21 hours agoGeorge Washington is a Tankie. Hitler is a Tankie. Makhno is a Tankie. Elon Musk is a Tankie. Etc.
Obviously, the term “tankie” is only applied to the left. My point was that in that respect there is not really any difference between the extremes of the political spectrum. You could even say they converge in some way.
No, horseshoe theory is just liberalism trying to distance itself from fascism, when historically liberalism abd fascism correspond to capitalism doing okay and capitalism in crisis respectively.
Further, liberalism has also been responsible for mass violence, both the progressive kind such as in the French revolution, and the horribly reactionary kind when it comes to slavery, colonialism, genocide of Palestine, etc.
Redefining words and whataboutism. Name a more iconic duo.
What words did I redefine? What “whataboutism” did I do? I explained very clearly why your definition is bad, and applies to everyone. Comparison is not “whataboutism” inherently.
You’ve expanded the definition to include nearly everyone. All states are authoritarian, in that they are all instruments by which one class wields its authority over other classes. Revolution is the most authoritarian action there is, as was liberating the slaves in Haiti, the Statesian south, etc. You’ve erased any analysis of what these political aims are, essentially saying only pacifists have validity, and historically pacifists have been some of the least effective, or even damaging to their movements.
The communists that wish the working class to wield that authority wield it for progressive means, and in the interest of the people. Eventually, when class is abolished, even the state itself will be too.
I suggest you read the articles I linked, you can read both in the span of ~15 minutes and you’ll have a much better understanding of what “tankie” means.
Your theory has just one minor flaw: every violent revolution ever has resulted in one clique of repressive assholes being replaced with another. And every time they’ve betrayed every ideal they ever did it didn’t have in order to cling on to power. How is your revolution going to be different?
Your comment has one major flaw: it’s wrong.
Revolution in France, for example, ovethrew an oppressive monarchy. Napoleon took power, but it was still an improvement, and in the long run was even better. In Haiti, slavery was overthrown, in Algeria colonialism was overthrown. These are just for national liberation movements and general revolution.
Socialist revolution in Russia, China, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, Korea, and more have all dramatically improved key metrics like life expectancy, dramatically democratized society, increased literacy rates, and lowered disparity while dramatically developing society. Socialism achieves far better metrics at similar levels of wealth and development, even in the face of brutal sanctions.
There is no “betrayal of ideals,” there’s the real process of existing in the world and facing real struggles. Socialism isn’t magic or perfect, it’s simply a much better economic system than capitalism. It isn’t immune to problems or struggles, and it doesn’t gift those running the economy with prophetic visions. Liberal anti-communists hold socialism to a higher standard than liberal systems, refusing it outright if it isn’t heaven on Earth, and call it a “betrayal” if it isn’t immediately a perfect wonderland while giving liberalism a pass, or mild critique.
I expect revolution in the US Empire to go a similar way, only that it won’t be at risk of being nuked or sanctioned to death by the US Empire.
I highly suggest doing more research on the topic at hand, I can make recommendations if you want.
So having all of Europe drenched in blood by Napoleon was an improvement? And you conveniently forgot the terror. Similar things could be said about your other examples. The rest is just assertions without evidence so I’ll have to pull Hitchens’ razor.
The rest is just assertions without evidence
Literally all of your claims have been assertions without evidence
THERE were two “Reigns of Terror,” if we would but remember it and consider it; the one wrought murder in hot passion, the other in heartless cold blood; the one lasted mere months, the other had lasted a thousand years; the one inflicted death upon ten thousand persons, the other upon a hundred millions; but our shudders are all for the “horrors” of the minor Terror, the momentary Terror, so to speak; whereas, what is the horror of swift death by the axe, compared with lifelong death from hunger, cold, insult, cruelty, and heart-break? What is swift death by lightning compared with death by slow fire at the stake? A city cemetery could contain the coffins filled by that brief Terror which we have all been so diligently taught to shiver at and mourn over; but all France could hardly contain the coffins filled by that older and real Terror—that unspeakably bitter and awful Terror which none of us has been taught to see in its vastness or pity as it deserves.
-Mark Twain
In the end, moving beyond feudalism to capitalism was progressive, just as moving on beyond capitalism to socialism was and is progressive. This is rarely bloodless, but it pales in comparison to the daily violence of the present system.
Secondly, I did offer evidence upon request, I find when I just dump sources people tune out. If you have specific questions, I can back them up with answers and evidence, otherwise the lack of evidence applies just as much to you.
The rest is just assertions without evidence so I’ll have to pull Hitchens’ razor.
Neocon Iraq war supporting Christopher Hitchens? weems like a weird guy to quote if you’re opposed to the state murdering people but ok
I’m an anarchist though I do get called a tankie quite a lot as a pejorative.
I’m opposed to all states. That said as someone who lives in the west I don’t really care to spend a lot of energy being mad about what my governments state enemies are doing.
‘democracy’ in capitalist states is a cruel facsimile of actual democracy. If you don’t have money for rent you might as well be unpersoned, corporations are people and money is free speech.
The question is, do you want to murder people who disagree with you?
Obviously not. Not sure what you’re trying to get at here though.
No in the sense of back when anarchists used it to mean ML/Stalinist/AES types. No idea right now where the word seems to have no meaning. I don’t think I’ve heard a definition of “tankie” that described my politics at least so probably still no. In general you should just say what you mean.
It’s just a pejorative for communist at this point, alongside “pinko” and “red.”
It was very bizarre seeing that change happen in real time. It was always a stupid word though, because even back when it was an anarchist term for a particular type of Marxist, the boundaries of what exact kinds of Marxists were encapsulated by it always changed from anarchist to anarchist. If you’re actually talking politics and not memeing then you should say what exactly you mean.
To be fair, it still means something different to everyone, the common denominator is generally anti-imperialism, pro-communism, Marxism, etc.
No
I don’t think so but I have been called it. So from my perspective no. from other peoples perspective. yes. From what I think a tankie would be (full communist workers own the means of prodcution who then says russia or such is in the right direction) no. I mean I doubt they look at me as one of their own. I sorta doubt tankies like the term though if per se. I mean there is a difference between feeling that karl marx writings are correct and outlays a way for society to run and saying nk, china, and russia are doing a bang up job.
No communist thinks the Russian Federation is socialist, at most there is critical support in that the RF opposes the US Empire and the west as well as maintaining strong ties with socialist countries, but most communists do support the PRC and by extension the efforts of the CPC to develop a robust socialist system.
As for “tankies,” many label themselves as such as more of a joke, or to disempower the term. The actual pejorative though is fairly meaningless.
Yeah I think that when it comes down to it tankie is basically an insult to those that use it as a label and means whatever they want it to. So on the one side I will talk about how renting is not bad when the person who “owns” property lives there and get a lot of flak. I equally get flak when I talk about how property ownership is sorta an illusion given with taxes and such everyone rents from the government in some shape or form along with the fact that the government has to control an area and recognize the ownership for there to be ownership.
So on the one side I will talk about how renting is not bad when the person who “owns” property lives there and get a lot of flak.
I’m a former owner-occupant of a multi-unit property. This is a textbook petit bourgeois assertion, the kind of thing that Bernie Sanders might say. He’ll rail against crony capitalism and über capitalism but not per se capitalism. Petit capitalism as a treat inevitably leads to the haute capitalism and oligarchy we suffer under today.
I will talk about how renting is not bad when the person who “owns” property lives there and get a lot of flak.
nah it’s great being treated like a second class citizen by a fucking parasite with a part time job
If you’re meandering around support for capitalism, you’re not a communist, so I wouldn’t think “tankie” would apply to you.
