The general usage refers to people who are so brainwashed that they will ardently deny and even defend massive crimes against humanity committed by their government. In the case of China, deniers of Tienanmen or the Uyghur Genocide would apply. In the case of America anyone that denies israel is committing Genocide applies.
And the glorious leader supporting that Genocide is none other than Genocide Joe Biden.
Calling someone a tankie is saying “You’re a piece of shit not only because you support these atrocities, but you dare call yourself a communist while doing so.”
You think “tankies” support Biden?
That’s certainly a unique take.
Last time I checked Tankie Joe said israel has not committee any war crimes and certainly isn’t committing Genocide.
That is literally not what tankie means.
What do you believe it means?
Only Commies that deny Genocide are Tankies?
Well, yeah. Folks that fell for China’s propaganda specifically.
The general usage refers to people who are so brainwashed that they will ardently deny and even defend massive crimes against humanity committed by their government. In the case of China, deniers of Tienanmen or the Uyghur Genocide would apply. In the case of America anyone that denies israel is committing Genocide applies.
And the glorious leader supporting that Genocide is none other than Genocide Joe Biden.
Interesting. I’ve legitimately never heard of the word being used in any context other than what I described. Thank you for sharing.
I still feel weird calling Biden a tankie, though I do see where you’re coming from.
He’s not a tankie: “tankie” only really applies to people that call themselves communists. The insult “tankie” was invented by communists calling out the hypocrisy of some of their self-proclaimed “fellow communists”.
Calling someone a tankie is saying “You’re a piece of shit not only because you support these atrocities, but you dare call yourself a communist while doing so.”
Oh wow, that’s pretty definitive. Looks like the meaning I’ve understood is correct – according to Wikipedia at least (which I tend to trust).
@[email protected] what do you think? It looks like you may be misusing the term.