Short answer: folk who are so pro-Communist that they think the Tiananmen Square massacre was a good thing. The massacre in which the CCP bulldozed protestors with tanks.
Hence, “tankie”
Edit: apparently I’m wrong on the origin of the term, and it predates Tiananmen Square. See the reply below.
I will add that given the current projection of power currently, China is a far more powerful authoritarian communiststate than Russia, so most tankie propaganda is China-centric these days.
It’s in relation to the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia during the Prague spring, where they were doing evil things like giving people more freedoms and not having everything under centralised authoritarian state control so the soviets sent over some tanks to kill people and enforce their imperialistic control over the country.
Ironically enough doing more to encourage actual communism than the larpers in Russia ever did.
Nah tankies specifically are those that support Maxist-Leninism to a fault. Thats why they sypport the tanks rolling over student protestors. They’ll fight for single party state socialism that winds up not as a vanguard, but as corrupt state capitalism. Other leftists despise them because revolution doesn’t necessarily mean becoming the USSR, nor should it.
I’ve learned not to lean into labels - the right seems to be as dangerous to democracy as the far left, as they seem to now embrace the tactics of what we used to consider “leftie” or communism. They want to maintain control and don’t care how they get it.
Edit: And this is why I don’t like labels. You think you know what I said because I wanted to define your label.
Horseshoe Theory has many critics. I personally don’t think of it as elitism in the center and popularism at the ends. That’s not true - neither end is Popularist. These extremes just oppose whatever the democratic status quo is. They want extreme solutions and anyone who tries to moderate is labeled Elitist or Capitulant…both labels deny that most of us live in the center, trying to balance one sides wants with the other.
I would add that extremism of any kind will never get full support of most of the population, so whenever they get any kind of power, it leads to the same authoritarian patters, brutal targetting of opposition, elimination of plurality of opinion, all-encompassing propaganda etc.
Extremism leads to structures which are antithetic to freedom, basically.
While they don’t get the same support, because they are so extreme, they get the most attention … in the press, in social media, in the general zeitgeist. They hover above all conversations and pollute downstream goal and choices.
I think it’s only once it gains mindset and traction does the forcers of Democracy kick into gear; the trick is to move democracy forward quickly before traction becomes entrenchment (like the Supreme Court).
I don’t disagree, so long as we’re talking about similar distances from center when we say ‘far’. At least in the US, people talk about the far right and the far left, except they’re really talking about people who are slightly left. US doesn’t have far left. Far left is the USSR and other authoritarian communist states (I’m unsure if any of these still exist).
Though honestly I think it just makes more sense to push back against anyone who’s too far on the authoritarian scale as I feel like that’s mostly what people have a problem. Governments (in my opinion) need to be at least a bit authoritarian in order to enforce laws at all, but a lot of the modern political sphere is pushing hard on overly authoritarian policies in nearly every space and country.
You’re comparing apples to oranges. Both the left and the right can be good. The problem is that people are hungry for power and money. Any system crumbles when the foundations are based on greed and corruption.
I really hate the left vs right fight, it is pointless. Both systems can be good, both systems have flaws, both systems can be exploited, both systems have been exploited in the past… A system isn’t going to save you from a corrupted government and corrupted private interests
Libertarianism, IMHO, has always been a sheeps-clothing for Authoritarianism. All it does is break it down to “the wants of the individual overriding society”, but winking & knowing full well it only works when individuals collect and work as a group. Libertarianism === Authoritarianism.
That’s just ignoring anarchism and libertarian socialism which is very much anti-authoritarian. That said, in the US libertarianism is pretty bastardized (right-libertarianism) and doesn’t reflect what libertarian means around the rest of the world.
Wrong spectrum. Both Republicans and Tankies are authoritarian, which is why they feel similar (especially because current republicans are barely even conservative and have mostly gone all in on the authoritarian part).
Not only that, they despise leftist movements that call modern China what it is. Revisionist.
They hate Khrushchev while embracing the same bankrupt ideology that he pushed, but only whoever it’s in one of the countries that currently claim to be socialist. The social imperialism of the USSR was replaced by the social imperialism of Deng’s China and that was a good thing in their mind.
Okay, I’m clearly ignorant. What’s a “tankie”?
Short answer: folk who are so pro-Communist that they think the Tiananmen Square massacre was a good thing. The massacre in which the CCP bulldozed protestors with tanks.
Hence, “tankie”
Edit: apparently I’m wrong on the origin of the term, and it predates Tiananmen Square. See the reply below.
I will add that given the current projection of power currently, China is a far more powerful authoritarian communiststate than Russia, so most tankie propaganda is China-centric these days.
That’s a wrong answer.
It’s in relation to the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia during the Prague spring, where they were doing evil things like giving people more freedoms and not having everything under centralised authoritarian state control so the soviets sent over some tanks to kill people and enforce their imperialistic control over the country.
Ironically enough doing more to encourage actual communism than the larpers in Russia ever did.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankie
In your defence, it’s confusing trying to keep track of who these authies murdered with tanks.
Wow thanks! TIL :)
Yeah honestly I’m pretty socialist but not authoritarian in the slightest. Hearts and minds first.
Oh wow. So like, extreme right wing and the fucking Republicans. Fuck all those people.
Yeah, extreme left wing basically. Think that capitalism should be overthrown by force. Same as jan6-ers but pro Communist
Nah tankies specifically are those that support Maxist-Leninism to a fault. Thats why they sypport the tanks rolling over student protestors. They’ll fight for single party state socialism that winds up not as a vanguard, but as corrupt state capitalism. Other leftists despise them because revolution doesn’t necessarily mean becoming the USSR, nor should it.
Extreme left-wing/communists.
I’ve learned not to lean into labels - the right seems to be as dangerous to democracy as the far left, as they seem to now embrace the tactics of what we used to consider “leftie” or communism. They want to maintain control and don’t care how they get it.
Removed by mod
I’d say theory has been refined in practice.
Edit: And this is why I don’t like labels. You think you know what I said because I wanted to define your label.
Horseshoe Theory has many critics. I personally don’t think of it as elitism in the center and popularism at the ends. That’s not true - neither end is Popularist. These extremes just oppose whatever the democratic status quo is. They want extreme solutions and anyone who tries to moderate is labeled Elitist or Capitulant…both labels deny that most of us live in the center, trying to balance one sides wants with the other.
I reiterate: Labels are a bad idea.
I would add that extremism of any kind will never get full support of most of the population, so whenever they get any kind of power, it leads to the same authoritarian patters, brutal targetting of opposition, elimination of plurality of opinion, all-encompassing propaganda etc.
Extremism leads to structures which are antithetic to freedom, basically.
While they don’t get the same support, because they are so extreme, they get the most attention … in the press, in social media, in the general zeitgeist. They hover above all conversations and pollute downstream goal and choices.
I think it’s only once it gains mindset and traction does the forcers of Democracy kick into gear; the trick is to move democracy forward quickly before traction becomes entrenchment (like the Supreme Court).
I don’t disagree, so long as we’re talking about similar distances from center when we say ‘far’. At least in the US, people talk about the far right and the far left, except they’re really talking about people who are slightly left. US doesn’t have far left. Far left is the USSR and other authoritarian communist states (I’m unsure if any of these still exist).
Though honestly I think it just makes more sense to push back against anyone who’s too far on the authoritarian scale as I feel like that’s mostly what people have a problem. Governments (in my opinion) need to be at least a bit authoritarian in order to enforce laws at all, but a lot of the modern political sphere is pushing hard on overly authoritarian policies in nearly every space and country.
Totally agree.
Libertarian vs autoritarian. Left vs right.
You’re comparing apples to oranges. Both the left and the right can be good. The problem is that people are hungry for power and money. Any system crumbles when the foundations are based on greed and corruption.
I really hate the left vs right fight, it is pointless. Both systems can be good, both systems have flaws, both systems can be exploited, both systems have been exploited in the past… A system isn’t going to save you from a corrupted government and corrupted private interests
Libertarianism, IMHO, has always been a sheeps-clothing for Authoritarianism. All it does is break it down to “the wants of the individual overriding society”, but winking & knowing full well it only works when individuals collect and work as a group. Libertarianism === Authoritarianism.
That’s just ignoring anarchism and libertarian socialism which is very much anti-authoritarian. That said, in the US libertarianism is pretty bastardized (right-libertarianism) and doesn’t reflect what libertarian means around the rest of the world.
Again. Labels are bad. We should call them out for what they are - anti-democratic.
Wrong spectrum. Both Republicans and Tankies are authoritarian, which is why they feel similar (especially because current republicans are barely even conservative and have mostly gone all in on the authoritarian part).
Well, the tanks in question are actually those sent by the USSR to crush the Hungarian Revolution and Prague uprising.
I haven’t seen this yet outside of pro China forums.
Didn’t lemmygrad pop up on your feed yet? It makes me want to puke
I must be blessed, never seen or know much about that instance outside of some memes poking fun of em
deleted by creator
Tankies aren’t leftists. They simp for genocidal far right dictatorships.
Not only that, they despise leftist movements that call modern China what it is. Revisionist.
They hate Khrushchev while embracing the same bankrupt ideology that he pushed, but only whoever it’s in one of the countries that currently claim to be socialist. The social imperialism of the USSR was replaced by the social imperialism of Deng’s China and that was a good thing in their mind.
deleted by creator
Right isn’t a synonym for evil. The left has a lot of genodical leaders, like Stalin, Mao, Castro, just to name the biggest ones.