- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
Second thought has been groomed into being a Tankie. His words should generally be distrusted.
I mean he has done two AMAs on hexbear so clearly he is
This is something I occasionally hear and keep not understanding, and it makes me wonder if the word “tankie” is being thrown around a bit fast and loose. Last time I heard this, the reasoning referenced a Vaush video, which is… less than convincing.
My working definition of “tankie” would be someone who unironically full-on likes China*, which is not a take I’ve ever known J.T. to have. Do you use a different definition than me, or do you have specific things you’re upset about?
* Bear in mind I mean "likes China" here, not "thinks China and the U.S. are equally bad."
My understanding of the full story, which comes from my personal observations of how his positions and rhetoric have changed paired with information people I trust have conveyed to me, is that Hakeem (a known Tankie) bragged about becoming Second Thought’s personal confidant and shifting his position on several issues as he was becoming more educated in the left as a whole. His rhetoric shifted from liberal to left-leaning followed by several instances of him using tankie talking points and I remember at least one explicitly tankie video, which is around the time I gave up on him.
Tankies are authoritarians posing as leftists. People who lionize Mao, the Kim Regime, Stalin, Lenin, etc. Tankies always despise America as a concept and will usually give support to whatever they think is worst for America, regardless of how it affects the people not just of the United States, but of the world. I once had a tankie justify this stance and their position that anyone who isn’t a tankie by telling me that the CIA had a program where they would make leftists movements that could ally with American hegemony, so anyone who didn’t hate America was a fake leftist. These are the individuals you see who say that the GOP and DNC are equally bad, talk about how Russia invading Ukraine is fine actually, and how China invading Taiwan is actually good, because Taiwan is full of delusional people denying their heritage to pretend to be white. This is a series of talking points I had with an actual person over a conversation that lasted more than a week. I have since decided that I won’t waste my time trying to talk to them anymore.
So that’s my perspective on it. I can’t promise it’s perfect or even that it’s any good, but it’s the one I have. Hope that helps.
Edit: also, I’m fading in and out of a migrane nap, so apologies for the potential errors/lack of coherence/etc.
Late response (sorry!) but wanted to let you know that I appreciated the comment and details. Personally, this doesn’t convince me he’s a tankie, but that’s largely because I’m not familiar enough with Hakeem to know he’s a tankie, nor do I know what video you were referring to. Which is not to say you’re outright wrong — just that I would want to see more specifics to change my opinion, is all. All the same, I appreciate the effort and am happy to better understand your position.
I do somewhat agree with your definition of a tankie, for what it’s worth. I don’t think saying the GOP and DNC are both bad is necessarily tankie behavior, but the rest makes sense. This said, I’ve personally seen extremely little defense of Russia from any far-left discourse, including communities close to Second Thought, and from what I hear from those communities China is still very divisive. You’ve clearly encountered worse though, and my experiences are limited, so take them for what you will.
We’re internet strangers no need to apologize. 😂
Ty for the response, though. 💝
What did he say that is factually incorrect? Did you even watch the video?
Nope; I’m done with him at this point. If you pay attention, my comment isn’t criticizing the video itself but warning about potential inaccuracies.
I don’t need to watch a video to comment on the trustworthiness of its creator.
Edit: your comments about Kamala and Trump being politically similar makes me think you shouldn’t be trusted either.
Remember how excited people were when Kyrsten Sinema was elected? This was an out, fabulous lesbian from a decidedly red state. Her seat was almost certainly going to lead to progressive movement.
But nope.
And now the people are telling me I have to be excited about another bootlicker for the billionaires because she’s a woman and a person of color, but no.
TLDR: This video is on point. Harris is going to rule as a conservative and it doesn’t matter that she’s a Democrat, a woman, or a POC.
So who do you propose who isn’t a “bootlicker”
It’s too late for that. You guys had Williamson in the primary, but I’m apparently the only one who voted for her.
(deleted - moved instance)
It’s unfortunate that we have to take the time these days to consider whether the constant drum of gloom and doom is actually genuine concern or straight up astroturfing. It certainly does seem like the people who constantly spout this stuff and ignore all evidence that they’re completely off base are being a bit disingenuous for some reason, though.
Who is going to bother astroturfing beehaw, right before we switch platforms of all things
If I were strategizing for the Trump campaign I would absolutely be trying to target smaller leftist-specific spaces to pull them away from the Democrats and inject talking points of benefit to the campaign. Beehaw has small numbers, but it has a very leftist and pretty vocal user-base. It’s a small pool that it wouldn’t be hard to change the narrative in by injecting the same opinions over and over again. Which is what we see.
It makes way more sense to focus on small communities like Beehaw where a small number of messages can have a larger impact on the thinking of people who use it regularly, than exclusively on huge social media spaces like Facebook and Twitter where they’re shouting into the void.
Get some talking points stuck in the minds of a small pool of people, get them to normalize it, and they’ll spread it for you.
kamala and Trump are complete opposites
Personality-wise, definitely.
Politically, not as much as you’d think, judging by how we always end up being ruled by conservatives.
(deleted - moved instance)
(like Obamacare)
Obamacare isn’t universal health care. The access it promises only exists if a person can afford to be price-gouged for their health care, and the majority of this nation can’t.
Abortion
It doesn’t matter what your stance is if you’re content to just let the worst happen and then use it to raise money, which is what Democrats did. (The cost of our bodily autonomy was $80 million, in fact.)
Corruption in the courts
Again, it doesn’t matter what your view is if you have power and choose not to wield it. By default, Democrats have sided with corruption by doing nothing to stop it.
Trump is the only world leader I know of who is a bully with a victim mentality. Kamala is not
You must not be familiar with US foreign policy then.
(deleted - moved instance)
