I know for a lot of people a tankie is just something that they know it when they see it, however I think that it is important to think about the reason that you define something as being tankie vs just a leftist.

  • @PugJesusM
    link
    English
    164 days ago

    For me, a tankie is someone who plays apologist for fundamentally authoritarian regimes just because those regimes are painted red.

    I would say there’s a larger Chomskyite-style group of useful idiots who often get lumped in with tankies, but who are not, themselves, actual supporters of authoritarian-style socialism. They just eagerly eat up and regurgitate agitprop from actual tankies. Campist brainrot often runs rampant here, but they aren’t actual tankies. I sometimes mock them with similar lines, though, under the old “Nine Nazis at a table” logic - when you’re working for fascists, whether you agree, strictly speaking, with their ideology is of less importance.

    Basically every leftist who doesn’t believe that the path to socialism is by a vanguard party detached from actual democratic processes taking control of the entirety of society and enforcing its will on the populace is not an actual tankie.

    • Flying Squid
      link
      94 days ago

      They’re not even painted red. There is nothing whatsoever communist about Russia and Putin would never claim that Russia was a communist country. But they oppose America and Europe, so that doesn’t matter to Tankies.

      All that matters is that the strongman is against the West.

      • @PugJesusM
        link
        English
        134 days ago

        That’s part of the campism. If you nail them down on the topic of Russia, specifically, they will disavow modern Russia precisely because it isn’t painted red. But for every action on the international stage, they will unfailingly support Russia, because Russia is against the West’s ‘camp’. Same with Iran.

        On the other hand, if you nail them down on the USSR and the PRC, actual tankies will almost always outright speak in support of both, if not necessarily unconditionally. Though the conditions they apply are… party-approved. In the spirit of “MAYBE there were SOME excesses and bad choices, but also you have to understand that the bourgeois FORCED us to take most of these measures!” that dedicated Communists who got swept up into the GULAG still parroted to their fellow inmates during the Stalin years.

        Regimes with a very thin coat of red paint, like Assad’s Syria, still often receive this bootlicking treatment from actual tankies.

        • Flying Squid
          link
          74 days ago

          I don’t disagree. I especially enjoy it when they start talking about how Stalin was a great leader. I’ve also seen “everyone sent to the Gulags deserved it” being bandied about lately.

          • Skua
            link
            fedilink
            64 days ago

            The best one was definitely that time that a hexbear user joined in to lemm.ee’s “do we defederate from hexbear?” thread to tell the admin that “your kulak great grandparents deserved it” apparently on the basis that he’s Estonian and doesn’t like the Soviet Union

            • Flying Squid
              link
              54 days ago

              I got a better one than that one. I was told by one of them that Stalin put thousands of Jews in the gulags for the same reason Nazis put them in concentration camps (apparently deservedly both times)- “they were radical Marxists.”

              Like, WTF? Isn’t that a good thing to you?

              • Skua
                link
                fedilink
                34 days ago

                Is the distinction being drawn between Marxist and Marxist-Leninist, or is “radical Marxism” referring to radicalism as in Jeremy Bentham? Or is there some third thing going on?

                • Flying Squid
                  link
                  44 days ago

                  I decided not to delve into the topic because I can only stomach so much bigotry.

                  • Skua
                    link
                    fedilink
                    44 days ago

                    That was probably a sensible decision

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Chomsky wasn’t an authoritarian… and most anarchists are led there from Chomsky. I’m one of those people who started with manufactured consent and ended up in anarchist land.

      But yeah, I’d agree that tankies are all authoritarians and support for authoritarianism (even as a means to an end) is the dividing line between tankies and non tankies.

      • @PugJesusM
        link
        English
        44 days ago

        Chomsky wasn’t an authoritarian…

        As I said, “who are not, themselves, actual supporters of authoritarian-style socialism. They just eagerly eat up and regurgitate agitprop from actual tankies. Campist brainrot often runs rampant here, but they aren’t actual tankies.”