I’ve seen this word “tankie” used alot recently here.
From context, I envision a middle aged rivet counter with simplistic ideas. Like a boomer with a military interest?
ShivaX
5687
Oh no, it’s people who love Stalin and Mao generally.
The West is always wrong and when Communists oppress people, it’s a good thing.
Termed from the Soviets driving tanks into nations to suppress uprisings and people in the West supporting them as they did it.
It has a Wikipedia page even:
Specifically, it was used to distinguish party members who spoke out defending Soviet use of tanks to crush the Hungarian Revolution of 1956 and later the 1968 Prague Spring uprising or, more broadly, those who adhered to pro-Soviet positions in general.
The term is also used to describe people who endorse, defend or deny the crimes committed by authoritarian left-wing leaders such as Joseph Stalin, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot and Kim il-Sung. Members of the anti-Stalinist left use the word to describe those who are perceived to be biased in favor of authoritarian states (such as the [People’s Republic of China]
(China - Wikipedia) and Democratic People’s Republic of Korea) that are currently ruled by communist parties
Ph wow I was well off the mark.
So, Jeremy Corbyn could be accused of being a tankie?
Nah, neither he nor Trump would be tankies, imho. While they have both argued for policies that would benefit Russian ambition, it’s not done out of a deep belief that Russia’s stated goals are righteous. Corbyn is just a would-be Chamberlain while Trump doesn’t actually believe in anything but the pursuit of wealth and power.
On the other hand, you’re likely to find tankies supporting them, co-opting their views into some broader context of how it’s right to support Russia’s oppression of its neighbors.
ShivaX
5690
Corbyn also at one point said Russia is wrong and it’s all their fault instead of blaming the US and NATO immediately.
Aceris
5691
Not a tankie, but #1 with tankies.
ShivaX
5693
The more I see these sorts of things (between the other painting and milk in the store nonsense) the more I drift towards people who say it’s false flags from groups to discredit these positions. Because it’s so fucking stupid that at least Exxon paying people to make climate change proponents look like idiotic weirdos makes some sort of sense.
But the far more likely reality is that people are just stupid.
Scuzz
5694
That somehow getting attention for your cause led you to attempt to deface a Monet is amazing. The stupidity and arrogance of said people is just overwhelming.
I don’t like it either but I understand desperation in the face of total failure and inaction.
Timex
5696
People who destroy beautiful things for attention need to get their asses beat.
The first painting that this was done to (tomato soup) was protected by glass, so no damage done.
Not sure about this second.
I’m sure Cockroach Herodotus will thank us for prioritizing the safety of the Van Goghs and Monets.
Timex
5699
No offense, but this is a dumb fucking take.
Why not just murder children? I mean, after all, it’s silly to prioritize the life of a single child compared to the entire planet.
Your can support environmentalism while simultaneously not destroying unique works of art
DoubleG
5701
Explanation from one of the first protestors:
Scuzz
5702
Why not stop freeway traffic or paint bomb cars?
Except I’m not going to listen to anything she has to say, now. She is not helping. She is making everything worse.
Alstein
5704
This one was proven to be a false flag, or at least funded by someone likely to be a false flag. It’s possible the kids who did this are true believers.
So you are in favour of more disruptive and damaging tactics, rather than symbolic gestures?
