And no, I’m not saying don’t vote; I’m saying that there comes a point when voting isn’t going to solve the problem

  • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    2 months ago

    “Actual” tankies don’t exist, outside of perhaps a handful of edgy teens. The way I use the term is defined by common use, regardless of the stated definition. In actual practice, anyone who defends anything a communist government has ever done, even if it’s something as minor as acknowledging the success of Cuba’s literacy program, is liable to be called a tankie by someone. I could try to fight it but I’d be fighting virtually every time the term is used, and I prefer to just reclaim it. You might as well ignore it, or love the word instead, because you ain’t done nothing if you ain’t been called a Red

    • dactylotheca@suppo.fiOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      “Actual” tankies don’t exist

      Have you seen Hexbear? Honestly, saying they don’t exist outside of a few edgy teens seems a bit myopic

      • OBJECTION!@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Yes. Hexbears do not defend everything any communist government has ever done, and therefore do not meet the stated definition of tankies.

        It’s virtually impossible for anyone to be an “actual” tankie. The Soviet Union collapsed, so obviously it had to have flaws. The Sino-Soviet split happened, so clearly at least one of them had to have been in the wrong. Khrushchev criticized Stalin and Deng criticized Mao, so in both cases, either the criticism was correct and the target was flawed or the criticism was incorrect so the person doing the criticism must have been flawed. Even if you tried to, you couldn’t knee-jerk support every communist leader.