this post was submitted on 10 Jul 2026
92 points (97.9% liked)

Slop.

887 readers
313 users here now

For posting all the anonymous reactionary bullshit that you can't post anywhere else.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No bigotry of any kind, including ironic bigotry.

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target federated instances' admins or moderators.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The term Tankie has a clear definition that Cowbee likes to ignore:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankie Tankie is a pejorative label generally applied to authoritarian communists, especially those > who support or defend acts of repression by such regimes, their allies, or deny the > occurrence of the events thereof.

Join the lemmy.ml boycott today and help foster a better Lemmy-verse! No more posts, comments (except to counter their propaganda ofc!) or upvotes on any comms on the > Lemmy.ml instance! To make this easy you can do an instance block at Settings > Block Tab > Scroll to bottom > Input "lemmy.ml" and apply

And consider donating to individual instances instead.

Check the megathread for more!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net 13 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Wait. It was Wikipedia. Not even a dictionary.

"Tankie is a pejorative label generally applied to authoritarian communists, especially those who support or defend acts of repression by such regimes, their allies, or deny the occurrence of the events thereof."

So, as a pejorative the support or defense of Acts of Repression is so in the opinion of the person using the pejorative. It doesnt say who is being repessed, I want some stuff repressed. This is a piss poor definition because it's far from definite.

[–] Kefla@hexbear.net 12 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I mean it's a good definition because it accurately reflects how the word is used. It's the word itself that is silly and indicates the person using it sucks.

[–] GalaxyBrain@hexbear.net 9 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

The definition should point that kut

[–] jack@hexbear.net 7 points 3 weeks ago

That's implicit in all definitions