What do you think a tankie is? What’s a communist? Tankie is, as I understand it, just a pejorative for communists, so if you can help elaborate on what you think these terms mean we might be able to come to an understanding. I consider myself to be a communist, for what it’s worth.
I do aswell (maybe), imo Tankies are communists who believe that the acts of historical communist dictatorships are/were justified, and glorify war and esp communist russia & china
See, this is where I disagree a decent bit. “Tankie” isn’t just used against communists, it’s used against anarchists, even liberals. The main connecting string is defense of existing socialist states, like the aforementioned PRC and USSR. This defense does not mean that tankies believe that the allegations of the Red Scare are both true and justified, there’s usually a large disconnect between perspectives on what actually happens in socialist states and what we receive in (presumably) the west. Glorification of war is not something I can say I’ve seen, outside of I suppose some communists liking soviet military gear.
If I were to give my own definition of what constitutes a tankie, I’d say it’s anyone who defends existing socialist states, past or present. Those socialist states are generally understood to be the USSR, PRC, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, DPRK, GDR, etc. The defense tankies give is not in accepting both bourgeois historiography as accurate but justified, but instead in directly combatting bourgeois historiography. Tankie is also a pejorative for these people, used to convey the strawman of the person that believes the lies of the Red Scare but believes them to be justified.
In that case, I am definitely a tankie. I spend a good deal of time talking about socialism both past and present, and arguing for how we can expand that movement and carry it to the future. I am definitely a defender of socialist states, I just don’t believe the common allegations such as “100 million were killed by communism” are at all accurate. I don’t think you’ll find someone who believes the 100 million number but also thinks it’s good and justified, these people do not exist, but it sounds like that’s what you believe a tankie to be. Am I misunderstanding you?
I see, personally I find Tankies to be overall harmful to change, specifically the people who will defend that there are no problems with existing states, even the dprk and such
I haven’t met anyone that thinks that there are no problems with existing socialist states. I think you see pushback against common liberal critique of socialist states as a belief that there’s no socialist critique. Either way, “tankies” by the way I have described them are the only ones that have actually gotten change, be they the Cubans, soviets, Chinese, etc.
What’s your point? I already said communists tend to critically support the Russian Federation.
Tankies != communists
What do you think a tankie is? What’s a communist? Tankie is, as I understand it, just a pejorative for communists, so if you can help elaborate on what you think these terms mean we might be able to come to an understanding. I consider myself to be a communist, for what it’s worth.
I do aswell (maybe), imo Tankies are communists who believe that the acts of historical communist dictatorships are/were justified, and glorify war and esp communist russia & china
See, this is where I disagree a decent bit. “Tankie” isn’t just used against communists, it’s used against anarchists, even liberals. The main connecting string is defense of existing socialist states, like the aforementioned PRC and USSR. This defense does not mean that tankies believe that the allegations of the Red Scare are both true and justified, there’s usually a large disconnect between perspectives on what actually happens in socialist states and what we receive in (presumably) the west. Glorification of war is not something I can say I’ve seen, outside of I suppose some communists liking soviet military gear.
If I were to give my own definition of what constitutes a tankie, I’d say it’s anyone who defends existing socialist states, past or present. Those socialist states are generally understood to be the USSR, PRC, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, DPRK, GDR, etc. The defense tankies give is not in accepting both bourgeois historiography as accurate but justified, but instead in directly combatting bourgeois historiography. Tankie is also a pejorative for these people, used to convey the strawman of the person that believes the lies of the Red Scare but believes them to be justified.
In that case, I am definitely a tankie. I spend a good deal of time talking about socialism both past and present, and arguing for how we can expand that movement and carry it to the future. I am definitely a defender of socialist states, I just don’t believe the common allegations such as “100 million were killed by communism” are at all accurate. I don’t think you’ll find someone who believes the 100 million number but also thinks it’s good and justified, these people do not exist, but it sounds like that’s what you believe a tankie to be. Am I misunderstanding you?
I see, personally I find Tankies to be overall harmful to change, specifically the people who will defend that there are no problems with existing states, even the dprk and such
I haven’t met anyone that thinks that there are no problems with existing socialist states. I think you see pushback against common liberal critique of socialist states as a belief that there’s no socialist critique. Either way, “tankies” by the way I have described them are the only ones that have actually gotten change, be they the Cubans, soviets, Chinese, etc.