I’ve run across these terms several times, but without enough context to figure out what they mean. Could someone help me out, please?

ETA All of you are amazing! A huge thank you to everyone who responded, and an extra thank you to those who have provided links or explanations to further and/or related information. I am learning so much by reading all of these comments!

  • Earthwormjim91@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    169
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    Sealioning is the constant bad faith, feigning ignorance, asking for evidence of everything under the guise of “just asking questions”. Then ignoring any evidence presented and moving on to the next demand. Used to shut down discourse entirely.

    Tankies are leftists that defend or deny the atrocities committed by authoritarian communist regimes like the Soviet Union or the CCP. It was first used to describe communists in Great Britain that defended the Soviet Union for using tanks to crush anti-communist revolutions.

        • Aatube@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          37
          arrow-down
          16
          ·
          1 year ago
          1. Probably ≠ all
          2. Nope, if you do (after Deng for China, after Stalin for USSR, for other time periods you could be a leftist) and have extensively learned about it you probably think you’re a leftist but you’re actually a rightist. Think about how exactly the sum of their policies align with left values more than right values.
          • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            18
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Nope, if you do (after Deng for China, after Stalin for USSR, for other time periods you could be a leftist) and have extensively learned about it you probably think you’re a leftist but you’re actually a rightist.

            So you think Jeremy Corbyn isn’t left? Lmao. What about Lula? Every Cuban politician?

            Think about how exactly the sum of their policies align with left values more than right values.

            This is you trying to re-align left vs right as culture instead of economic. It’s seriously america-brained bollocks and is not how anyone in the rest of the world views left vs right.

            • ScrimbloBimblo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              22
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              He’s not saying they’re right wing governments, just that they’re highly authoritarian, which is something that leftists, on average, tend to be against, so if someone claims to be “left” but supports Russia, they likely have a poor understanding of one of those things.

              • Shit@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                I mean it’s more of an up down issue and not a left right issue right? Most authoritarianism stuff ends up sounding the same. They both hate liberalism and want to stomp it out before they fight it out over the left right divide.

                • FaceDeer@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  This is a major example of why I despise the left/right “spectrum” that is so universal in political discourse these days. These views are not simple enough to be defined along a one-dimensional axis like this.

                  I’m increasingly fond of the 8 values test, which splits things up along four distinct axes. Still too few, but definitely far better than just one.

              • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Idk if I like this “left means anti authoritarian” thing I’ve seen floating around recently. By that interpretation right wing individualist anarchism is actually left wing, because though it is called right wing in the traditional sense of individualism v collectivism where collectivism is left wing, it is certainly against authority.

                Rather, I’m fine with this interpretation, but can we all get together and figure out whether or not “left” means “anarchism” or “collectivism?” This “it means either one of the two and people will just decide one is correct and deny the existence of the other definition and which one that is depends on who you’re talking to at that moment, and I won’t define it when askef, I’ll just act like you’re stupid for not knowing which one I choose to use today” shit is getting old and I’m like 99% sure it’s intentional as a technique to appear to win an argument without having any argument to speak of.

              • Aatube@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Like @shit (from shitjustworks, nice one) said, these don’t conflict. While I didn’t say anything about authoritarian (communism especially vanguardism is authoritarian and it never works out), I personally believe that modern China is right wing. For example, their current government wants to merge traditional values with law.

            • Aatube@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              18
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              Thank you for helping to spread Chinese, Soviet, and ableist propaganda. Plus you didn’t respond to that “probably” part.

        • Very_Bad_Janet@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          May I introduce you to the Far Right in America? They are often keen to downplay any Russian acts of aggression. ETA: Not saying that they would fit the definition of tankies, just that you don’t have to be a leftist to (overtly or tacitly) support Russia.

          G.O.P.’s Far Right Seeks to Use Defense Bill to Defund Ukraine War Effort

          The group’s proposals have no chance of passage, but they have further mired the military spending bill in a partisan fight and highlighted Republican divisions over the war.

          https://archive.is/2023.07.13-123054/https://www.nytimes.com/2023/07/12/us/politics/defense-bill-republicans-ukraine-war.html

    • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Tankies are leftists that defend or deny the atrocities committed by authoritarian communist regimes like the Soviet Union or the CCP. It was first used to describe communists in Great Britain that defended the Soviet Union for using tanks to crush anti-communist revolutions.

      Ironically history has proven that decision to have been the correct one and even the soft-left here in Britain today acknowledges that the people who were called “tankies” originally when that happened were all completely correct.

  • AvaddonLFC ☄️ 🤘@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    131
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Sealioning” here refers to a way of trolling by asking ill-intended questions, usually disguising it in innocence. When other members try to explain and help, they’d try to lure them into hours of discussion upon it, usually by knowingly misinterpreting what they heard.

    Or worse, just directly disrespect and reject all the suggestions the commenters provided. The essence is being a waste of time for everyone.

      • TheBananaKing@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        But y’know, if someone walks up and makes disparaging racist remarks about how they don’t like your kind, following them round and demanding they explain themselves out loud is about the most appropriate response that exists.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I mean, yeah, if they’re racist.

          But just because the comic picked a sea lion doesn’t mean it’s about race… It’s just an easy way to identify a group of things.

          It could be “people who kiss their grown children on the mouth” or “people who smoke crack 5 times a day”.

          It’s any group of people.

      • blackbelt352@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        1 year ago

        Sealioning is a sort of evolution of JAQing off. It’s the JAQ coupled with feigned innocence and indignance when people actually stop putting up with BS.

        Actually after thinking a bit deeper about it, it mirrors Socratic Questioning, but with the opposite intended end goal of muddying the waters instead of gaining clarity.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        1 year ago

        Concern trolling is acting like you’re concerned about the consequences of something.

        Like,

        If we let people wear masks during COVID, we’ll see more bank robberies because masks are normalized!

        Sea Lioning would be if I just kept asking you questions about why masks help, often while asking you to link sources. I don’t actually want to see any sources tho. I’m just going to keep asking new questions and for more sources until you get tired and stop replying.

        Because the more time you waste on me, they less you help people who are genuinely asking for it. Plus when you stop replying, I can claim that as a victory because that must mean there aren’t any sources that agree with you.

      • dustyData@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s related but it differs on the form. Concern trolling is derailing online discussions and debates by simulating concern over a seemingly valid counterpoint, making all participants waste time and effort arguing a previously settled matter, or pretending to just be playing devil’s advocate. Acting as if, although you support the cause or discussion at hand, you somehow still have some valid concerns to oppose.

      • AvaddonLFC ☄️ 🤘@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I don’t think so. As far as I’m aware, concern trolling is an act to lower morale and place distrust among the opposing side. A person who’s on side B pretends to be on side A.

        Let’s say you’re an admin on this site, and you have made a post asking for server donations.

        Then just when all was going well, another member comes to the comments, who seems to support you and praise you really well at first. The rest of their comment is then telling everyone that they “appreciate your work”, but “you can’t handle it”, because this or that. Causing some of your genuine members to question you with their “concerns”

        I’m on your side, so you should take my bullshit concerns seriously!

      • blackbelt352@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Concern trolling is “raising concerns” about certain issues that have little to no basis in reality and only serves to inject bigotry and bad ideas. For example, people were concerned about “the gays™” spreading their immoral gay AIDS virus all over innocent children during the 80s and into the 90s, only to learn that AIDS is spread through contact with broken mucosa membranes, which then shifted to “the gays™ are pedos” argument.

        The “concerns” are nearly always disingenuous.

    • KurtDunniehue@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’ve seen Sealioning used quite a bit in a particular Lemmy instance that would self describe themselves as Pro-Russia & Pro-China, as a way of shutting down discourse between people who disagree with them. There are people who disagree with a particular narrative, and they’re discounted immediately for wanting to know how someone would arrive at a pro-Russian & pro-China position.

      Also they’ll just “whatabout!” and change the subject whenever unassailable critiques of these regimes come up. As if its is only possible to hold outrage in a single direction at a time.

      I’ll have you know I’m capable of disliking EVERYONE mentioned in a given conversation.

    • dhork@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Everyone points to the comic in regards to sealioning, but I have always equated it to posters who are incapable of having an actual debate and keep saying “Why? Why? Why? Why?” until they get tired and fall asleep under the pier (but then their friend wakes up and takes over).

    • Blamemeta@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Worst bit is sealioning is almost indistugishable from legitimate questions a lot of time.

            • AvaddonLFC ☄️ 🤘@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              That would depend a lot on the context. What catches a moderator’s attention on an issue like this wouldn’t be seeing the individual post, rather seeing the reports about it. A mod usually acts on the consensus of the community and tries to determine if the members are correct in reporting things. They may be correct or wrong, but most of the time it’ll be correct. And we’d of course step back and apologize if we thought we were wrong.

    • aaron_griffin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      1 year ago

      I usually think of sealioning as also requiring some element of butting in with your pet issue when it’s not apart of the discussion.

      OH YEAH WELL WHAT ABOUT UKRAINE?!

      • meco03211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Biden’s gas prices are so high. Worst president ever.

        gas prices go down

        mention that Biden should be congratulated for lowering prices if he was the cause for them going up

        Yeah well… he’s still the worst for all these other reasons!

    • RagingNerdoholic@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      But why, specifically, is the term “Sealioning”? Is it referencing some behavior exhibited by sealions? Is it an aggregate of or wordplay on other slang?

  • skepticalifornia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    87
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Tankies” is slang for communists who align with the philosophy of authoritarian rule, like the Soviet Union who used violence to keep countries under their control in check.

    Sealioning is something I saw a lot on Reddit, but not so much here - it is when someone responds continuously asking questions, trying to seem like they are engaged, but in reality they are trolling you. Like when you say something like “The sky is so blue today” and the come back with “That is interesting, do you have a link to some information that I can learn more about that?”

          • Lem Jukes@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            A, not op but ok

            B, are y’all misreplying to the wrong comment or are y’all bots because both of these comments don’t make sense in this context.

            Edit: fuck, I’m stupid

      • magnetosphere@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Dealing with sealioning can be utterly exhausting (which is the point, whether they fully realize that or not) especially when done by someone with experience.

        • FaceDeer@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          A related fallacy is the Gish gallop, in which an endless stream of bogus arguments are spewed out faster than any of them can be refuted. Even if it’s really easy to refute each one individually, the constant stream is overwhelming and then eventually the user can go “aha, you couldn’t refute X!”

    • fuck reddit@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      Asking for proof isn’t necessarily trolling. Someone making wild claims should have to source their knowledge

      • dorkian_gray@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        1 year ago

        Asking for proof isn’t necessarily trolling

        This is correct; sealioning is characterised by asking questions in bad faith. If you ask a question, get an answer, and reply with the same question as though you did not get an answer, that is sealioning.

        Personally, I always assume questions are asked in good faith and answer accordingly; it’s only when I get the same question in reply, or one that addresses precisely nothing I said, or one that egregiously twists my argument and/or words, that I view it as a troll and disengage.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      They’re not really communists tho, because (like you said) they defend the use of violence by a ruling class

      A ruling class just wouldn’t exist under actual communism. Which is the main reason communism won’t work for any group more than like ~200 people in size.

      They’re fans of fake communism like the Soviet Union or China

      • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’d agree with you, but Marx literally calls for a temporary dictatorship of the proletariat in the communist manifesto

        • KurtDunniehue@ttrpg.network
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah and as smart as anyone is, they aren’t right all the time. As much as you can agree with his messaging, it’s important to critically assess everything said, regardless of who is saying it.

        • Poob@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Marx had many good ideas, but he wasn’t perfect. Leftist theory also didn’t stop when he died.

        • Robbeee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Dictatorship at the time didn’t mean necessarily authoritarian, it just meant government. Someone always dictates however they may be elected. He felt the people dictating should be the working class.

        • Raphael@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Dictatorship of the proletariat must be permanent, read it again. Also look up what Dictatorship of the proletariat means before spreading FUD.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah the dictatorship of the proletariat shouldn’t be thought of as like the dictatorship of Saddam Hussein but rather as forceful removal of hierarchy from society. “We will learn to live as equals no matter how difficult it is and those who refuse to join in the work will be punished.” If you’re just getting rid of the people who held power before the revolution and not fighting the desire for power you’re just gonna wind up with a red czar.

      • skepticalifornia@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        1 year ago

        Agree totally. Communism is one of those things that cannot work in the real world. Someone above said it well - you go so far left that you end devolving into fascism and that is apparent with what is going on in Russia right now. Money begets power begets more money and on and on…

        • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          1 year ago

          Out of curiosity what makes you think 2023 Russia is left wing? They weren’t even the last of the countries to leave the USSR. They privatized Soviet holdings in the 90s. Putin is former KGB sure, but he’s been very pro capital his entire reign.

          • skepticalifornia@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Oh, I don’t think they are leftist at all. My point was that Russia dominated the Soviet Union (do you agree with that?) and the fall of communism has resulted in what we see now, and it is not pretty, with business, money and politics very much intertwined.

    • merde alors@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      we used to call them Maoists.

      but Trotskyists I met later on, though less dangerous, were always more fanatical, nostalgically passionate 🤮

      • hexachrome@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        i’d figure tankies by strictest definition to be garden variety MLs, though yeah this typically includes support for mao.

        my experience of trots has been old trade union guys trying to hawk papers/do book clubs linking everything somehow to permanent revolution, with a side of turning up to pickets. idk if i’d call them fanatical, they tend to spend too much time bickering about organisation amongst themselves. definitely agree with the weirdly nostalgic part though

  • nothacking@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    81
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Tankies are the cringe “communists”, authoritarians that beleave that no one but them (definitely not rich people) should have power. You can generally spot them because they often idolize the Soviet Union and CCP, despite the fact that both were/are authoritarian shitholes.

    Sealioning is when you repeatedly ask someone basic questions in an attempt to annoy them or make it look like they don’t have any. Often sealioners pretend they just want to engage in debate, but in reality ignore or deny any evidence or arguments presented.

    • Epicurus0319@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      51
      ·
      1 year ago

      Basically “when de revolushin happensh der gonna issue ush bridesh and lower dee age of conshent to shirteen”

  • Neato@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    73
    arrow-down
    22
    ·
    1 year ago

    Tankies are Red Fascists. They’re essentially communism-flavored authoritarians. I would contend they do not qualify as “left”, “leftists”, etc but far-right. They support and defend Soviet Russia and the CCP, specifically defending their atrocities and oppression.

      • FaceDeer@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I suppose it’s always possible to believe in a benevolent dictator who will use their authority to establish whatever system it is that you think is “best”, even if it’s not authoritarian. Lots of revolutions try that.

      • tempest@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t see why not since progressive leftist describes where their beliefs lie and authoritarianism describes how they go about enforcing their beliefs.

        Really depends on how specific you want to be with the definition of leftist though.

        • IchNichtenLichten@server1.duluth.lol
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sure, I guess I equate a desire to be subject to an authoritarian, strongman type leader as something that appeals more to people on the right. We’re a diverse and messy species though so there’s likely someone, somewhere who will be the exception that proves the rule.

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Can there be such a thing as a progressive/leftist who is pro-authoritarianism?

        Not really.

        Progressivness is about freedom, authoritarianism about the lack of freedom.

        But someone could hypothetically be an actual communist and an authoritarian. Because communism is just an economic system.

        In practice the only way it would work is “mob rule”. Like what happened during the French revolution where people rose up, killed the ruling class, and then distributed their wealth.

        But even that wasn’t the same because the mob didn’t attempt to distribute it equally. Everyone just grabbed shit.

        I think it’s especially confusing to people with a two party political system, because economic and social policy start to get intertwined, when they’re two different things.

        Which a cynic would say is intentional so that no matter who gets elected, the wealthy win.

        • IchNichtenLichten@server1.duluth.lol
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          A cynic or a realist? All political systems have to have some checks against human greed and avarice or things quickly turn to shit for the average person. If you can’t vote someone out, that’s an important check you’re giving up.

      • Neato@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        From wikipedia:

        Left-wing politics describes the range of political ideologies that support and seek to achieve social equality and egalitarianism, often in opposition to social hierarchy as a whole[1][2][3][4] or certain social hierarchies.[5]

        According to emeritus professor of economics Barry Clark, supporters of left-wing politics “claim that human development flourishes when individuals engage in cooperative, mutually respectful relations that can thrive only when excessive differences in status, power, and wealth are eliminated.”[6]

        So maybe? If you had a truly benevolent dictator that promoted equality, freedom (limited to everything except changing nature of government) and prosperity for all then that might fit? But in the real world, not effectively.

        • IchNichtenLichten@server1.duluth.lol
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’ve seen plenty of people start off with good intentions and then they change when they get a taste of power.

          “Power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority; still more when you superadd the tendency of the certainty of corruption by authority.” - Lord Acton.

      • 0235@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Environmental change activists? They have pretty authoritarian views on certain subjects, even if they are more “liberal” and alternative views?

  • IchNichtenLichten@server1.duluth.lol
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    One thing about sealioning that I haven’t seen mentioned yet is that it’s a tactic designed to utterly exhaust the other person by asking question after question with no willingness to listen to the answers. It’s there to waste time and grind down your opponent until they have had enough of your bullshit and tell you to fuck off. At that point you can feign offense and declare victory.

    • xapr@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Thank you, that really explains it! I was afraid that I may come across as sea-lioning sometimes because I tend to ask lots of questions, but the comic makes it more clear what sea-lioning is.

      • speck@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        It boils down to whether you argue in good faith. Even better, if you discuss in good faith. Asking a lot of questions that comes from a desire to learn or from curiosity usually lands differently then the disingenuous questioning of someone like a tankie

    • Chainweasel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I can’t seem to open the link, it just says “There’s nothing here” I’m not sure if it’s my Lemmy client or if it’s just gone, but does anybody have a mirror?

  • FatsLardenfeldt@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Sealioning originiates with this comic strip. Tankies is a perjorative term broadly applied to anyoneone with marxist-leninist beliefs, applied by centre left and liberals. It refers originally to the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia with the implication being that “tankies” support the crushing of resistence to Soviet authority but used more generally just do dismiss anyone with militantly anti-capitalist ideals.

    • Jo@readit.buzz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      applied by centre left and liberals

      It’s a term that originates with the left. Specifically, those who broke with the USSR over imperialist invasions, referring to those who did not. More broadly, it refers to the authoritarian left (as opposed to the anarchist left).

    • danhakimi@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Tankies are generally not just anybody with communist perspectives, but a. certain extreme. A tankie is the type of person who will essentially argue that capitalism and western society are the roots of all evil, and deflect from any criticism of Russia, China, Iran, etc. by attacking the US instead of actually addressing the criticism.

      • MxM111@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The economic system in China, Russia and Iran is (undemocratic) capitalism.

      • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah I’m an anarchist. I have friends who are ML. If they were to say, support a theoretical Cuban invasion of Rojava (listen there aren’t many anti capitalist countries in 2023) because Rojava isn’t the right kind of anti capitalist that would be some tankie ass shit.

        The Soviets weren’t saying “be communist or be destroyed” the rebels believed in communism they just wanted self rule.

        Also tankie usually implies someone supports Russia and China no matter what they do. Often they use the argument of being anti imperialist even when defending imperialist expansion.

        • ExecutiveStapler@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you genuinely accept critiques of Iran, China, and Russia as well as disliking the West’s capitalism then you’re just a communist, not a tankie. However if you just kinda accept critiques in a “No one’s perfect” kinda way but still cheer when Russians shoot Ukrainians, you’d be a tankie who fell for Russian propaganda. I’d recommend looking into the firehose of falsehood, it informs a lot about certain righties’ and lefties’ perspectives.

          • danhakimi@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’re not even necessarily a communist. I don’t call myself a communist, but yeah, there are problems with capitalism, that’s not a weird thing to say.

          • elscallr@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m fine being called an anarchist but I prefer the term “voluntarist”.

            As long as I’m free to opt out of the collectivism I’m happy to live alongside it and encourage others to engage with it if they want.

        • Cylusthevirus@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s just regular old black and white thinking. Every time you’ve decided that an “ism” is the root of all the world’s evils you’ve lost the game. Doesn’t matter what it is. The “isms” are never the source of the trouble; that would be humanity itself.

      • BouncyFerret@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Thank you for responding. I have boiled down the aggregate of answers as basically a tankie supports authoritarianism, or use of violence to deal with opposition. If this take is incorrect, someone please correct where I have it wrong. Btw, I have deliberately ignored references to left/right as meaningless in my quest for information.

        • Raphael@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Macron is using violence to deal with the opposition is France, he would be a tankie by your current definition.

          Netanyahu is a dictator, Biden would be a tankie by your definition, as he supports Netanyahu.

          Tankie is pejorative for “far-left”, that’s it, it’s an insult.

          Btw, I have deliberately ignored references to left/right as meaningless in my quest for information.

          You can’t do that, this is strictly about politics.

  • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Hakim explains: https://youtu.be/LcJ5NrJtQ8g

    Vijay Prashad (regularly works with Chomsky) explains: https://youtu.be/tsqE9kEsDVY

    The Deprogram explains: https://youtu.be/YVYVBOFYJco

    In short, “tankie” is a thought-terminating phrase thrown into any conversations where people want to get others to terminate all thought coming from people to their left. It gets thrown at communists by other communists, it gets thrown at communists by anarchists, it gets thrown at all of the above by socdems, it gets thrown at all of the above by liberals, and it gets thrown at all of the above including liberals by fascists.

    Its function in actual practice is that it moves discourse and spaces rightwards. Anyone using the phrase should be completely disregarded as a person that wants you to keep your brain closed.

    • MaoWasRight@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      That top down explanation is pretty funny and accurate. Everyone is a Tankie to fascists.

  • 小黑。@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    43
    ·
    1 year ago

    People complaining about “tankies” are exactly like the people that complain about the “woke”. The behaviour is two sides of the same coin, one performed by conservatives-only while the other is performed by both of them in unity against the only anti-capitalists.

    Both are functionally meaningless, being undefined in any given situation so they can be thrown around in all places.

    • KurtDunniehue@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      But there are people who identify as left-wing who will support China and Russia while downplaying their authoritarianism.

      That’s not something being invented as a boogeyman. Anyone can go to lemmygrad.ml right now to see it in action.

    • Robbeee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      25
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      You got down voted but you’re right. Tankie is the new form of commie after that fell out of favor. Western “champaign socialists” (another term I hate but it kinda applies here) use it to criticize people from countries that actually have had socialist experiments. Most of the leftists globally are not western and would fit under the standard western definition of tankie. But if you’ve never come close to overthrowing your own government, are you positioned all that well to criticize someone elses revolution while you sit comfortably in the imperial core?

      Poor countries face challenges that rich countries can’t imagine often from western interference and revolutions are an ugly business. No Castro was not Santa Claus but he was a marked improvement over Batista.

      • Raphael@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        24
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Did you notice the huge amount of downvotes on any post in here that isn’t outright insults the so called “tankies”?

        You got down voted but you’re right. Tankie is the new form of commie after that fell out of favor.

        During the Red Scare, calling someone a “communist” was itself a death threat. Red Scare is now over and you have people openly declaring themselves communist, that’s why they had to come up with a new term. Tankie was their first attempt but they messed up by making it too restrictive, now they’re pushing a new term

        “Woke.”

        Example sentences: “Free healthcare is wokeism”

        The above is a natural evolution since “Free healthcare is communism” would have the opposite effect if you keep repeating it over and over. At some point people will declare themselves “woke” and the right will come up with yet another new term.

  • nednobbins@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Per Wikipedia, “Tankie is a pejorative label for communists and those who align with Marxism–Leninism ideology.” That’s basically what you get when you ask people to define, “tankie.”

    But, as with most perjoratives, its usage has expanded. It can still be used in its original meaning but it’s often used much more broadly. If you do a search on how people use the word “tankie” (like in comment threads) you’ll see it’s now commonly used to describe anyone who isn’t sufficiently critical of China and Russia and sometimes as a modern synonym for “un-American”.

  • MxM111@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    “Tankie” is a term originally used within the left-wing political sphere to describe those who supported the Soviet Union, including its use of military force to maintain its influence over its satellite states, particularly referring to the crushing of the Hungarian Revolution in 1956 and the Prague Spring in 1968 with tanks. Today, it’s often used more broadly, sometimes pejoratively, to describe people who uncritically support or idealize authoritarian socialist or communist regimes, often ignoring or downplaying their human rights abuses.

    • ChatGPT4
    • Raphael@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      How dare you bring up facts and unbiased views? Are you a tankie? GTFO! ChatGPT is a threat to American National Security!!! /s

  • culprit@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    Of all the things Kruschev would do after Stalin’s death that Stalin should’ve shot him for - running tanks into Hungary was absolutely correct

    The Communists who sided with tanks going into Hungary was how Communists earned the moniker “Tankie”

    Yet 50 years later it’s revealed that MI6 were training the rebels

    “Tankie” should unironically be worn with pride. In the fact “tankies” were absolutely correct in characterising the uprising as a semi-fascist counter-revolution (doors of jews and Communists were marked for extermination) that needed to be put down

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/mi6-trained-rebels-to-fight-soviets-in-hungarian-revolt-1359599.html

    Some of the weapons used were American, and others almost certainly British. Mr Smith says MI6 and the CIA had buried arms caches in the woods around Prague and Budapest for use by “stay-behind” parties or fifth columnists in case of war. Additional: The Truth About Hungary is a brilliant and quite short book worth reading. Published in 1957 it basically set out the character of the protests as semi-fascist and supported by the imperialist powers. Basically everything that was dismissed as Communist propaganda but has now been confirmed by the Western press. People seem to forget that Hungary only a 11 years previously was a fascist state allied with the Nazis and Left Anticommunists have continually tried to portray the uprising as a “socialist uprising but with a more human face”

    https://espressostalinist.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/the-truth-about-hungary.pdf

    Section from the book “The Truth about Hungary” by Herbert Aptheker; a prominent figure in U.S. scholarly discourse in the 1940’s, and Marxist Historian. Written in 1957 it outlined what later would be confirmed by the bourgeois Western press

    "The special correspondent of the Yugoslav paper, Politika, (Nov. 13, 1956) describing the events of those days, said that the homes of Communists were marked with a white cross and those of Jews with a black cross, to serve as signs for the extermination squads. “There is no longer any room for doubt,” said the Yugoslav reporter, “it is an example of classic Hungarian fascism and of White Terror. The information,” continued this writer, “coming from the provinces tells how in certain places Communists were having their eyes put out, their ears cut off, and that they were being killed in the most terrible ways.”

    “But the forces of reaction were rapidly consolidating their power and pushing forward on the top levels, while in the streets the blood of scores of massacred Communists, Jews, and progressives was flowing.”

    “Some of the reports reaching Warsaw from Budapest today caused considerable concern. These reports told of massacres of Communists and Jews by what were described as ‘Fascist elements’ …” (N.Y. Times, Nov. 1. 1956)

    “The evidence is conclusive that the entry of Soviet troops into Budapest stopped the execution of scores, perhaps thousands of Jews, for by the end of October and early November, anti-Semtic pogroms - hallmark of unbridled fascistic terror - were making their appearance, after an absence of some ten years, within Hungary.”

    "A correspondent of the Israeli newspaper Maariv (Tel Aviv) reported:

    During the uprising a number of former Nazis were released from prison and other former Nazis came to Hungary from Salzburg . . . I met them at the border . . . I saw anti-Semitic posters in Budapest . . . On the walls, street lights, streetcars, you saw inscriptions reading: “Down with Jew Gero!” “Down with Jew Rakosi!” or just simply “down with the Jews!”

    Leading rabbinical circles in New York received a cable early in November from corresponding circles in Vienna that “Jewish blood is being shed by the rebels in Hungary.” Very much later-in February, 1957-the World Jewish Congress reported that “anti-Semitic excesses occurred in more than twenty villages and smaller provincial towns during the October-November revolt.” This occurred, according to this very conservative body, because “fascist and anti-Semitic groups had apparently seized the opportunity, presented by the absence of a central authority, to come to the surface.” Many among the Jewish refugees from Hungary, the report continued, had fled from this anti-Semitic pogrom-like atmosphere (N.Y. Times, Feb. 15, 1957). This confirmed the earlier report made by the British Rabbi, R. Pozner, who, after touring refugee camps, declared that “the majority of Jews who left Hungary did so for fear of the Hungarians and not the Russians.” The Paris Jewish newspaper, Naye Presse, asserted that Jewish refugees in France claimed quite generally that Soviet soldiers had saved their lives."