It’s the tankie “It’s not a genocide, no I’m not denying that people are getting murdered I’m saying that they had it coming for reasons other than being of a particular group” kind of genocide denial-support.
About the only thing that makes tankies not technically fascist is that they come up with elaborate rationalisations of why everything they do serves the common good. They manage to rationalise any and all human rights abuses and atrocities as “necessary evil”.
Once upon a time a German lyricist/composer wrote a song satirising that kind of attitude. The GDR’s ruling party adopted is as their hymn, unironically. Do watch it it’s glorious in its insanity.
Most far-right fascists also make up excuses for the genocides they support - the Nazis said that Jewish people were responsible for the collapse of the Weimar economy (and a lot of other bullshit) for example.
Yeah but fascists don’t believe it, or even put much effort in those arguments. It’s merely a signal to their supporters saying “Yep we hate Jews”.
And I do grant tankies the point that they don’t inherently hate Uyghurs – what they hate is there being cultural aspects not under their control as that means a current of mass psychology outside of party control. The most they will countenance is “Socialism with Uyghur characteristics” next to “Socialism with Chinese characteristics”, under the condition that it’s about weave patterns of traditional hats or something, not loyalty to the party’s prerogative of interpretation: If Bejing thinks a particular weave pattern is counter-revolutionary then it is, Uyghurs don’t get a say.
By what definition of fascism are tankies the same?
I’ve seen the term tankie more here in my last week in the fediverse than at any other time in my life so forgive me if I don’t fully understand. From what I’ve gathered, it’s extreme auth-left. Though being authoritarian does not automatically mean fascist.
They’re not the same but the more you ignore motive and rationale the more similar they look. As such, they’re the same by the “definition” of shallow analysis, or over-subscribing to “the purpose of a system is what it does” which I tend to be guilty of.
Oh boy! That entire page is definitely something.
As someone born in a comunist country I can only pitty people like that. They must have had some pretty sheltered lives in order to be this detached from reality.
As others have said it is impressive what they’ve done with the platform and deserve prays for it, but man those views are going to push a lot of users away, especially when they are so public.
Not sure what I make of that. He quoted a guy, rather than giving his own opinion. We can make a lot of assumptions about why he quoted the guy, but without stating an opinion it can only ever be speculation. In a massive list of essays, which I admittedly haven’t read all of, one quote seems to be the big uproar about fascists running Lemmy?
And then being like “Hey maybe don’t delete posts just because they’re about China? That doesn’t break any rules,” suddenly makes them in love with the CCP? I don’t have any context to judge the quote and posts regarding China literally do not break any rule. “Orientalism” is a ridiculous reason to delete a post.
This all seems completely blown out of proportion like typical Twitter drama.
Calling something orientalism, in a Neo-Marxist context, is, roughly, calling Marx’s Eurocentrism problematic, which is 110% fucking fair. Used by a tankie it means “You can’t criticise China because you’re not Chinese”.
This. I’d really love it if someone could go through these links one by one and provide a detailed summary and rebuttal. I just want to know both sides of the issue. I totally believe in US propaganda, but highly doubt this is purely that.
I quite doubt you’ll see such thing as sane leftists generally simply discount tankie talking points out of hand – you look for certain patterns and the sources they cite and say “eh, not worth reading”, and also “eh, not worth replying to” because talking to a tankie is talking to a TV. They have a closed world-view, are able to bend reality itself to fit their core beliefs in the same way hardcore flat-earthers can.
You’ll be able to head over to random socialist places and find people who can readily address points, cut through the historical revisionism and selective reading that tankies do, but you’ll have to actually, well, ask questions and things might get egg-headed. If you address tankies directly I recommend going for broad-strokes arguments and questions and refuse to let yourself be dragged into areas that can’t be wikipedia’d quickly, say, the status of unions in the USSR. An unprepared tankie is not unlikely to flat-out claim that they were independent from the party. Ask them about whether they think people should be sent to Gulag over their interpretation of Darwin, suchlike: They will either deny it, at which point they disagree with Stalin which means that he did, in fact, do things which were not right, which is inconsistent with what they believe in, or they will support it, outing themselves as batshit crazy plain for everyone to see (and also disagreeing with post-Stalin USSR scientific community, much less the world’s scientific community).
Coming to the question of “why are tankies the way they are in the first place” though we come, at least from an Anarchist POV, to vanguardism as a core feature everything hinges on: The idea that for radical change to be possible, the masses must be led by a revolutionary vanguard. Marxist-Leninists all tend to fall into that category in one way or the other (and there’s plenty of e.g. Trots who are cringe but perfectly fine human beings) but it’s tankies who take it up to 11 by declaring themselves (and of course Stalin etc) infallible, and any opposition to their exalted “infallible” positions as counter-revolutionary. Thus, if you are not of the exact same opinion as them you’re the enemy and voila you have a cult going that can justify anything to itself.
This “change is caused by small groups leading broad masses” thing then leads to the “everything is a proxy war” type of thinking you see: It is inconceivable for tankies to think that Ukrainians would have a free will, a desire to decide their fate, and as they were drifting further and further away from Russia of course the CIA must be behind that. It’s pure projection.
(And, just for the record, yes, even Anarchists technically form vanguards. From “farming commune doing its thing and writing revolutionary poetry” to “Let’s stop right-wing militias from slaughtering native people and then live among the natives and talk about humanism”, see Chiapas).
(Also, Tankiedom is a CONTELPRO programme, their purpose is to make lefitsts in general look bonkers and inherently oppressive. Convince me otherwise).
I mean my stance is anarchism or left libertarianism, and I agree with most of what you said. But I also am just totally unfamiliar with these regimes. The only thing I’ve ever been taught is “bad”. I don’t really trust what I have been taught to be honest. I feel like there is a lot more nuance than the American POV. Also I’ve traveled enough to know that propoganda is EVERYWHERE. Every country propagandizes every other country. So it’s just hard to know what’s true about geopolitics tbh.
I think China and the USA are both terrible regimes, but in such a way that it’s generally fine to live there, which is a weird modern phenomenon. I bet Russia and Cuba aren’t what the US teaches. I suspect NK is a repressive hellscape IRL same as on TV lol.
Cuba can arguably be called democratic by now, though in a very different form than capitalist democracies. EU media is often apprehensive about the whole issue but acknowledges change, while in the US it’s the same old talking points up to “Batista did nothing wrong”, depending on where you look. It’s a bit further ahead in that aspect than Vietnam, which the US has much better relations with.
Russia tends to get completely misunderstood by everyone but its neighbours: Moscow’s rule has been based on conquering and oppressing neighbouring regions ever since the Mongols left. It provides them access to раздолье, meaning both expanse and liberty, a word with right-out mythical meaning to the Russian soul, though maybe Americans might actually understand. There’s a wide-spread notion among Russians, looking outside, that they want to be a “normal” country, but what that would entail completely eludes everyone, including the opposition.
Because, well, everyone is dozing, not just the depoliticised masses. Quoth Pushkin:
Whatever heavy load it carries,
The wagon’s light on steppe and street.
Grey Time, the coachman, never wearies
And never leaves the driver’s seat.
At dawn we jump inside the wagon,
Quite happy for our necks to break.
Scorning all soft delight and languor,
We yell “Get going, for fuck’s sake!”
By noon we’ve lost that daring folly,
Being jerked around. We’re wagon-sick
Afraid of every hill and gully,
And yell “Slow down, you lunatic!”
But on we rush round every bend.
We’re used to it, come evening’s yawn.
Heading to night, to journey’s end,
We doze. Time drives the horses on.
…quite a lot of soul-searching will be needed for Russia to get its shit together and install a GPS on that cart of theirs. Luckily they messed with the wrong people: Ukrainians, due to cultural closeness, are about the only people capable of cutting off Russia’s balls cleanly and thus throw the country into a proper existential crisis instead of trying to find, again, glory in old patterns. There’s nothing wrong with Russia attaining glory – just not like that. It worked out for them in the 1500s conquering what we now call Russia, but the time of imperialism is definitely over. Which is btw why Europe is so “unexpectedly” hawkish: The EU is a decidedly anti-imperial project, “let’s band together, united in diversity, so that no empire has a chance to challenge us”. Russia’s behaviour is an affront to all of that and cannot be permitted to stand.
As far the US is concerned it’s good ole cold war memories, they like fucking over Russia because it’s the USSR. I mean it would be kinda rich, the US criticising another country for being imperialist…
The Revolutions podcast had a good series on the Russian revolution if that’s a format you’re into. It includes the birth of Tankies as a name and phenomenon.
I was wrong, yes there is:
https://github.com/dessalines/essays/blob/master/socialism_faq.md#whats-going-on-with-the-uyghurs
It’s the tankie “It’s not a genocide, no I’m not denying that people are getting murdered I’m saying that they had it coming for reasons other than being of a particular group” kind of genocide denial-support.
About the only thing that makes tankies not technically fascist is that they come up with elaborate rationalisations of why everything they do serves the common good. They manage to rationalise any and all human rights abuses and atrocities as “necessary evil”.
Once upon a time a German lyricist/composer wrote a song satirising that kind of attitude. The GDR’s ruling party adopted is as their hymn, unironically. Do watch it it’s glorious in its insanity.
Most far-right fascists also make up excuses for the genocides they support - the Nazis said that Jewish people were responsible for the collapse of the Weimar economy (and a lot of other bullshit) for example.
Yeah but fascists don’t believe it, or even put much effort in those arguments. It’s merely a signal to their supporters saying “Yep we hate Jews”.
And I do grant tankies the point that they don’t inherently hate Uyghurs – what they hate is there being cultural aspects not under their control as that means a current of mass psychology outside of party control. The most they will countenance is “Socialism with Uyghur characteristics” next to “Socialism with Chinese characteristics”, under the condition that it’s about weave patterns of traditional hats or something, not loyalty to the party’s prerogative of interpretation: If Bejing thinks a particular weave pattern is counter-revolutionary then it is, Uyghurs don’t get a say.
By what definition of fascism are tankies the same?
I’ve seen the term tankie more here in my last week in the fediverse than at any other time in my life so forgive me if I don’t fully understand. From what I’ve gathered, it’s extreme auth-left. Though being authoritarian does not automatically mean fascist.
They’re not the same but the more you ignore motive and rationale the more similar they look. As such, they’re the same by the “definition” of shallow analysis, or over-subscribing to “the purpose of a system is what it does” which I tend to be guilty of.
Idk how to save comments so replying
…bookmark it in your browser?
Click on the three dots next to reply, click on the star.
…wait you’re using kbin. No idea.
So they’re pro-CCP, Uyghur genocide deniers?
Oh boy! That entire page is definitely something. As someone born in a comunist country I can only pitty people like that. They must have had some pretty sheltered lives in order to be this detached from reality. As others have said it is impressive what they’ve done with the platform and deserve prays for it, but man those views are going to push a lot of users away, especially when they are so public.
Which country if you don’t mind me asking?
Not sure what I make of that. He quoted a guy, rather than giving his own opinion. We can make a lot of assumptions about why he quoted the guy, but without stating an opinion it can only ever be speculation. In a massive list of essays, which I admittedly haven’t read all of, one quote seems to be the big uproar about fascists running Lemmy?
And then being like “Hey maybe don’t delete posts just because they’re about China? That doesn’t break any rules,” suddenly makes them in love with the CCP? I don’t have any context to judge the quote and posts regarding China literally do not break any rule. “Orientalism” is a ridiculous reason to delete a post.
This all seems completely blown out of proportion like typical Twitter drama.
Calling something orientalism, in a Neo-Marxist context, is, roughly, calling Marx’s Eurocentrism problematic, which is 110% fucking fair. Used by a tankie it means “You can’t criticise China because you’re not Chinese”.
This. I’d really love it if someone could go through these links one by one and provide a detailed summary and rebuttal. I just want to know both sides of the issue. I totally believe in US propaganda, but highly doubt this is purely that.
I quite doubt you’ll see such thing as sane leftists generally simply discount tankie talking points out of hand – you look for certain patterns and the sources they cite and say “eh, not worth reading”, and also “eh, not worth replying to” because talking to a tankie is talking to a TV. They have a closed world-view, are able to bend reality itself to fit their core beliefs in the same way hardcore flat-earthers can.
You’ll be able to head over to random socialist places and find people who can readily address points, cut through the historical revisionism and selective reading that tankies do, but you’ll have to actually, well, ask questions and things might get egg-headed. If you address tankies directly I recommend going for broad-strokes arguments and questions and refuse to let yourself be dragged into areas that can’t be wikipedia’d quickly, say, the status of unions in the USSR. An unprepared tankie is not unlikely to flat-out claim that they were independent from the party. Ask them about whether they think people should be sent to Gulag over their interpretation of Darwin, suchlike: They will either deny it, at which point they disagree with Stalin which means that he did, in fact, do things which were not right, which is inconsistent with what they believe in, or they will support it, outing themselves as batshit crazy plain for everyone to see (and also disagreeing with post-Stalin USSR scientific community, much less the world’s scientific community).
Coming to the question of “why are tankies the way they are in the first place” though we come, at least from an Anarchist POV, to vanguardism as a core feature everything hinges on: The idea that for radical change to be possible, the masses must be led by a revolutionary vanguard. Marxist-Leninists all tend to fall into that category in one way or the other (and there’s plenty of e.g. Trots who are cringe but perfectly fine human beings) but it’s tankies who take it up to 11 by declaring themselves (and of course Stalin etc) infallible, and any opposition to their exalted “infallible” positions as counter-revolutionary. Thus, if you are not of the exact same opinion as them you’re the enemy and voila you have a cult going that can justify anything to itself.
This “change is caused by small groups leading broad masses” thing then leads to the “everything is a proxy war” type of thinking you see: It is inconceivable for tankies to think that Ukrainians would have a free will, a desire to decide their fate, and as they were drifting further and further away from Russia of course the CIA must be behind that. It’s pure projection.
(And, just for the record, yes, even Anarchists technically form vanguards. From “farming commune doing its thing and writing revolutionary poetry” to “Let’s stop right-wing militias from slaughtering native people and then live among the natives and talk about humanism”, see Chiapas).
(Also, Tankiedom is a CONTELPRO programme, their purpose is to make lefitsts in general look bonkers and inherently oppressive. Convince me otherwise).
I mean my stance is anarchism or left libertarianism, and I agree with most of what you said. But I also am just totally unfamiliar with these regimes. The only thing I’ve ever been taught is “bad”. I don’t really trust what I have been taught to be honest. I feel like there is a lot more nuance than the American POV. Also I’ve traveled enough to know that propoganda is EVERYWHERE. Every country propagandizes every other country. So it’s just hard to know what’s true about geopolitics tbh.
I think China and the USA are both terrible regimes, but in such a way that it’s generally fine to live there, which is a weird modern phenomenon. I bet Russia and Cuba aren’t what the US teaches. I suspect NK is a repressive hellscape IRL same as on TV lol.
Cuba can arguably be called democratic by now, though in a very different form than capitalist democracies. EU media is often apprehensive about the whole issue but acknowledges change, while in the US it’s the same old talking points up to “Batista did nothing wrong”, depending on where you look. It’s a bit further ahead in that aspect than Vietnam, which the US has much better relations with.
Russia tends to get completely misunderstood by everyone but its neighbours: Moscow’s rule has been based on conquering and oppressing neighbouring regions ever since the Mongols left. It provides them access to раздолье, meaning both expanse and liberty, a word with right-out mythical meaning to the Russian soul, though maybe Americans might actually understand. There’s a wide-spread notion among Russians, looking outside, that they want to be a “normal” country, but what that would entail completely eludes everyone, including the opposition.
Because, well, everyone is dozing, not just the depoliticised masses. Quoth Pushkin:
…quite a lot of soul-searching will be needed for Russia to get its shit together and install a GPS on that cart of theirs. Luckily they messed with the wrong people: Ukrainians, due to cultural closeness, are about the only people capable of cutting off Russia’s balls cleanly and thus throw the country into a proper existential crisis instead of trying to find, again, glory in old patterns. There’s nothing wrong with Russia attaining glory – just not like that. It worked out for them in the 1500s conquering what we now call Russia, but the time of imperialism is definitely over. Which is btw why Europe is so “unexpectedly” hawkish: The EU is a decidedly anti-imperial project, “let’s band together, united in diversity, so that no empire has a chance to challenge us”. Russia’s behaviour is an affront to all of that and cannot be permitted to stand.
As far the US is concerned it’s good ole cold war memories, they like fucking over Russia because it’s the USSR. I mean it would be kinda rich, the US criticising another country for being imperialist…
The Revolutions podcast had a good series on the Russian revolution if that’s a format you’re into. It includes the birth of Tankies as a name and phenomenon.