Anarchism

2932 readers

2 users here now

Discuss anarchist praxis and philosophy. Don't take yourselves too seriously.

Other anarchist comms

Join the matrix room for some real-time discussion.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com

221

How do people actually fall into the "Tankie" mindset? (anarchist.nexus)

submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by stinky@anarchist.nexus to c/anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com

792 comments fedilink hide all child comments

After seeing a megathread praising Mao Zedong, an actual mass killer, and a post about a guy saying "99% of westerners are 100000000000% sure they know what happened in 'Tiny Man Square' [...] the reasons for this are complex and involve propaganda [...]," I am genuinely curious what leads people to this belief system. Even if propaganda is involved when it comes to Tiananmen Square, it doesn't change the atrocities that were/are committed everywhere else in China.

I am all for letting people believe what they want but I am lost on why one would deliberately praise any authoritarian system this hard.

Can someone please help me understand why this is such a large and prominent community? How have these ideals garnered such a following outside of China?

EDIT: Thank you to everyone who has responded! This thread has been very insightful :)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Everyone uses propaganda, so yes, always be critical of every source. But once you know what a sources biases are, there can still valuable information to be learned from them.

When sources contradict each other, as in the case of tankies vs. Lemmy, deciding which sources to trust can be complex and nuanced. Generally though, it comes down to sources who usually have a vested interest in the continuation of capitalism and often are outright fascists, versus sources who are communists and believe in equality and the betterment of all humanity.

In other words, qui bono?

[–] lmmarsano@lemmynsfw.com 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

sources who usually have a vested interest in the continuation of capitalism

cool ad hominem & appeal to unreliable authority fallacies. truth doesn't ultimately rely on authority, but their arguments, so it comes down to evaluating their arguments directly.

are they valid?
are their premises true?

if so, then their conclusions are true.

if you're only going by authority when an argument is provided & facts can be verified, then you're vibe-thinking.

[–] FlyingCircus@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

Apologies, I assumed it would be obvious that each source should be evaluated for the facts and arguments on their own merits.

I was talking about the times when documentary evidence is conflicting or doesn’t exist, which is when gauging the reliability of the source and their material interests and motivations becomes the most useful way of parsing fact from fiction.