Anarchism

2761 readers

62 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 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by stinky@anarchist.nexus to c/anarchism@lemmy.dbzer0.com

788 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

[–] poopsmith@lemmy.ml 0 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

You're making a semantic argument and wrapping it up with a "no true Scotsman" fallacy.

OP is making an assumption about his opposition with zero evidence to support his claim. It's a claptrap for people who want to feel intellectually superior, even if it's to a straw man.

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

Not really, no. Words have definitions. It's not a "semantic argument' to clarify the definition of a word. It's not "no true Scotsman" either, that's when you define a group by some unrelated or incidental quality. What I've referred to is the definition of a tankie. The quality described is neither unrelated nor incidental.

[–] poopsmith@lemmy.ml -1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

What I’ve referred to is the definition of a tankie.

Oh, I see, you're the authority on definitions, so whatever you say goes. Even the term "semantic argument" will be bent to mean whatever is convenient for your argument. Can you define "bad faith argument," lol?

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Uh, no. I just have the ability to look up definitions. The word means what it means

[–] poopsmith@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You said...

Tankies aren’t communists, they’re authoritarians with a red paint job.

Per the definition:

Tankie is a pejorative label generally applied to authoritarian communists

So you have the ability to look up definitions, just not to read them, apparently.

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 week ago

I know what it says, but "authoritarian communist" is an oxymoron, like "carnivorous vegan". They may call themselves communists, they may be members of a party that calls itself "communist", but authoritarianism cannot coexist with a stateless, classless, moneyless society.

Sloppy editing does not change that fact, and there is extensive literature and commentary providing clarification.