this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2025
649 points (96.0% liked)

The Democratic People's Republic of Tankiejerk

1044 readers
22 users here now

Dunking on Tankies from a leftist, anti-capitalist perspective.

Rules:

  1. No bigotry of any kind.
  2. No tankies or right-wingers. Liberals are allowed so long as they are aware of this
  3. No genocide denial

We allow posts about tankie behavior even off fedi, shitposts, and rational, leftist discussion.

Curious about non-tankie leftism? If you've got a little patience for 19th century academic style, let a little Marx and Kropotkin be your primer!

Marx's Communist Manifesto, short and accessible! Highly recommended if you haven't read it

Kropotkin's Conquest Of Bread

Selected works of Marx

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] vsg@lemmy.world 6 points 6 days ago

Hell, the socialist aesthetics aren't even necessary. Just hating the United States is enough.

[–] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 2 points 6 days ago (1 children)
[–] tempest@lemmy.ca 1 points 6 days ago

Nah, think I'm going to boil down hundreds of years of history in to 280 characters, that's the best way to get my point across in the tiktok age.

[–] lugal@lemmy.dbzer0.com 55 points 1 week ago (4 children)

that use the aesthetics of socialism

This isn't even a criteria for many

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] carrylex@lemmy.world 52 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

Don't worry - this is tankiejerk. We're an anti-tankie comm. Bootlickers aren't tolerated here.

[–] SomethingBurger@jlai.lu 39 points 1 week ago (1 children)

That's why they keep repeating the phrase "critical support". They support oppressive regimes in their fight against the US, but still remain critical of them (any criticism of their favorite dictatorship will get you banned).

[–] jjmoldy@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago

It's actually more like "critical hit" in a video game. If they hit a critical support with their internet comment then North Korea gets +5 anti imperialism for 20 minutes. It's the meta bro

[–] Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world 34 points 1 week ago (4 children)

"Whataboutism" is one of the most prevalent logical fallacies. It never makes any sense.

[–] finitebanjo@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (4 children)

If the much worse enemies of the USA have a lot to gain by the USA's downfall and are actively promoting said downfall, then it's not whataboutism to unmask them like a scooby doo villain.

Tankies don't give af about trans rights, Tankies don't give af about any human rights, Tankies don't want you to live and flourish in any capacity at all. Do not be fooled by their rhetoric all over Lemmy.

[–] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago

It's mostly from .ml in my experience, Hell, look at the goons spouting off against tgis post in these very comments. .ml

IMO, self respecting instances need to defederate from .ml so they are not so overrun by tankie clapping sealions... Just like with hexbear, they deserve to be silenced by social forces.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Another top contender is that all things with defects or drawbacks are equally horrible and unacceptable.

[–] jaupsinluggies@feddit.uk 5 points 1 week ago (2 children)

However it can be used to point out someone's hypocrisy. If country A is genociding people from country B, while screaming about people from country B genociding people from country C, "what about your genocide" is an appropriate response.

[–] Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Calling out hypocrisy can be valid but it must further discussion, not shut it down. In your example, if country A is committing genocide while condemning country B for genocide, the problem isn't just country B’s actions. It's that country A is deflecting from its own crimes instead of addressing them.

Saying 'what about your genocide' only matters if it leads to accountability for both. If it's just used to avoid taking responsibility, then it's whataboutism. It shifts the focus without solving anything.

To reiterate, whataboutism is deflection meant to shut down further discussion.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] stickly@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago

Appealing to hypocrisy is a fallacy, full stop. Someone can be a hypocrite but that has no bearing on whether an action is justifiable for both/neither.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Chee_Koala@lemmy.world 26 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

But... dichotomy is best omy? Putin can't be lying, because other states bad.

[–] LovableSidekick@lemmy.world 11 points 1 week ago

Also, if we want to make progress in the world and not let billionaires play us against each other, maybe the best judgement process is to evaluate how things are working out overall instead of slapping a black hat on anything that isn't perfect enough for a white hat.

[–] outhouseperilous@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

No, sorry, only one thing can be true at once. My working memory is really small.

[–] UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] DeathByBigSad@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 week ago

AITA Nation Edition v2: Electric Boogaloo

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago

Spoiler: It's waaaay more than three or four.

[–] Etterra@discuss.online 7 points 1 week ago

USA <- old and busted

FSA <- new and even more busted because the F is for Fascist.

[–] pdqcp@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 1 week ago
[–] vivalapivo 6 points 1 week ago

Gogogo power rangers

load more comments
view more: next ›