"Tanky" and the perception of Lemmy. (lemmy.world)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

133 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I've been trying to make people aware of Lemmy on discord and Mastodon, but it's always met with resistance citing "the devs are pro authoritarianism tankies." Kbin seems to be picking up steam because of the developer baggage.

Do you feel like this negative perception will hamstring Lemmy's growth?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It originally was used to describe Leftists supporting authoritarianism while claiming to be leftist. It was used originally to describe Marxist-Leninist members of the Communist Great Party in Britain who supported the use of tanks by Soviets to quell a couple of uprisings in the late 50s and late 70s.

And history proved that support to be 100% correct given what those uprisings were. Have you ever actually looked at who was riling it up (gladio implanted fascists), who backed them and who was coordinating it? The US and CIA played a huge role.

It's fucking weird that this gets brought up as some huge gotcha thing by people when the supporters have been shown to have been historically correct in their decision. It was unpopular and split a lot of parties but they were on the right side ffs read a book.

[+] [email protected] -15 points 1 year ago

And now it's used to describe people who ignore things like the genocide Uighur Muslims while saying things like China is so great. I actually never even mentioned the US in my brief (very brief) history of the term as it was just about why the term was there and why people are using it.

[-] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

I mean, you used that reference because you are implying that shutting down those pro-capitalist counter-revolutions by literal fascists using force was a bad thing, that's why you said "leftists supporting authoritarianism while claiming to be leftist".

You're just demonstrating that you have never actually engaged with learning about any of these events. You have the vagueist knowledge about them and only understand them within the lens of "tankies bad" instead of what actually happened during those events, why certain decisions were made, and what we have learned in the decades since they occurred that proved the supporters to be on the right side of the decisions.

[-] [email protected] -4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

No I never implied that at all (that'd be like linking the history of the word Yankee would imply that I support the British rule of the American colonies), I said here is the history of the word, which does have that history. I'm not a fan of all the shit the US does, especially the CIA. I actually never implied one thing or another besides saying where the word came from and what it's evolved into today. I honestly have no opinion on the origin of the word, but what it's used for today is perfect. It even fits perfectly to evoke images of the Tiananmen Square protests, which when I heard it originally is what I would have assumed it meant. Honestly getting so bent out of shape about this word is just odd to me, if you support this stuff wear it. Quit picking teams in your politics, seriously the whole "but actually the killing of those people was good because my favorite government did it" gets old whether it comes from the US or China

[-] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago

No I never implied that at all

Emphasis mine

It originally was used to describe Leftists supporting authoritarianism while claiming to be leftist.

Get out of here with that bad faith nonsense

[-] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago

Of course you implied that - you WROTE IT.

You are now backtracking instead of admitting wrong, what you should be saying "you know what, you're right I actually don't know anything about it but I regurgitate this because I've seen other anti-communists regurgitate a thousand times with literally no opposition so I've never taken any time to properly examine events, learn about them, or critically analyse whether the accusations have weight or not"... A response that would be mature, laudable, and the sign of a person who actually wants to grow as a human being. Instead what you seem to be doing is deflecting from this and trying to segue into something else. I am asking you to properly learn about this specific event first, if you want to talk about other events then I am fine with doing that.... But one at a time. This practice of bombarding people with dozens of different things at once is called Gish Gallop as is a tactic used in bad-faith to avoid any real critical engagement with the events.

[+] [email protected] -10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

And this is why people hate talking to tankies on the internet, you constantly rely on whataboutism and twisting everyone's words. I've never even said I'm anti-communist ever, literally just said that I don't support the actions taken by China and Russia when it comes to killing innocent people. I even said in my first comment I'm leftist, it's fine though, you really should read that Gish Gallop article you linked better.

[-] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I have done no whataboutism. What are you on about? Can you stick to the fucking topic?

If you don't want to engage that's on you. I told you I'm willing to, one at a time. That way we can get into each topic individually and give it the due care, research and understanding that it needs.

You are the ones avoiding engagement by demanding a 10,000 character response on every single topic simultaneously, which we all know that you will not read.

I’ve never even said I’m anti-communist ever

You don't need to say it, you display it in all of your actions. What do you do? What orgs are you in? What have you ever contributed to anti-capitalism other than spending all of your time on the internet shitting on every socialist project that has ever existed with absolutely no critical analysis of their rights and wrongs? I'm perfectly willing to get into the wrongs, there have been plenty of wrongs in the strategies of past projects or else we would've beaten capitalism already. The issue is that people like yourself tend towards only seeing and talking about wrongs, because you've created an identity for yourself around punching left and thusly preventing socialism instead of actually doing anything to construct it.