Seeing that the use of the word ☭TANKIE☭ has increased by 400% over the past few days, can anyone explain to me what it actually means now? I know that 60 years ago ☭TANKIE☭ was used to refer to the Khrushchevites, supporters of the intervention in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, etc. but clearly this is no longer the case.
On the word tankie
It's been used as a slur for any "Marxist"-Leninist for a long time.
Wrong. Maybe here it has been. Retarded anarchists and Leftcoms keep appropriating our anti-revisionist culture as always smh
As an anti-revisionist Marxist Leninist Maoist, sending the tanks into Hungary to crush the fascist revolt was one of the few commendable things Khrushchev did.
I felt the need to be more thorough.
The current owner of this board changed any mention of the word to go all caps with hammer/sickle symbols around it, on top of some other shit that has brought much criticism. This should be the primary reason for the supposed surge in mentions of the word. Trying to define it in a universal way would get me more replies than I would care to respond to, so I'll leave that to the people who will get this shit to over a hundred replies in no time.
That's three levels of revisionism right there.
Not just here, on the internet everywhere. Nobody cares how you use it in your autistic historical reenactment group.
Marxist Lennies are good in my book.
Its those brownnosing, petty and factional LARPers that are the T*nkies.
tankie is a slur for MLs
they also love tanks
pretty much it
It’s not just about “changing Marx” or whatever retarded shit people here think it means. It’s about undercutting the revolutionary edge of Marxism.
So whether Lenin was right or wrong with his theory of imperialism has little to do with whether he was a revisionist. Rosa Luxemburg was flat-out fucking wrong on many theoretical matters in Marxism but I don’t consider her a revisionist bc she was a revolutionary.
What can’t be defended from the perspective of Marxism is retarded shit like Mark Soc which was pushed by revisionists wherever they got even a tiny bit of power.
You must have a very shitty book.
But Joseph "socialism in only one country others pls don't revolt" Stalin was not revisionism?
Lol in what fucking world? They just call us “commies” and leave it at that.
Tankie means Holla Forums-tier authoritarian apologist and always has.
They don't even know what an ML is, why would they use the slur for them
Wow even without flags you got me pretty good.
Anyways, I meant "Leftist Authoritarian", before any pedants start telling me Hitler was an Authoritarian and no one calls NeoNazis ☭TANKIE☭s.
Dude that scene was fucked up IMO. Straight up wish fufillment. The hand of the writer is too visible. Since when is Westboro baptist the incarnation of evil in this world?
Where did Stalin say not to have revolution in foreign countries? He simply said it was possible to have socialism in one country. Nothing revisionist about that even if you think it’s wrong. He was trying to overcome the defeatist spirit of times after the failure of the revolution in Europe in the 20s.
It’s not like he didn’t help export the revolution to the whole of Eastern Europe and much of Asia too. At one time I think as much as 1/3 of the Earth’s population lived under nominally socialist regimes. Whatever you think about those regimes it’s unquestionably true that much of the expansion of socialism across the world occurred under Stalin.
In Spain, France and literally everywhere where it didn't align with his geopolitical interests.
They're just an acceptable target. Just like how the bad guy was a billionaire out of touch with the problems of the world and only focused on his pet project, an acceptable target.
These days, when I think Tankos I think MLs who say "it isn't imperialism/capitalism when China does it because China is Socialist and they're building Socialism." Nevermind that China building Socialism in Afghanistan in this way is a result of what Tankos would call American "imperialism."
They also tend to write long text posts about NK being workers paradise, support Assad, and do other things. Sometimes they have a point (for example when they defend Iran or Russia against the more asinine State Department propaganda), but China is the big reveal to me. As such, I don't really use the term Tanko around here because such persons I mainly see on Tumblr.
The one thing that Khrushchev did good was ruin stalin's image
how do you plan on launching and defending a revolution without some type of authority?
What THE FUCK is a Tanko?
Well I don't want a coercive hierarchy over my allies, I understand there has to be some use of force against the enemy, but not against the allies.
Anarchist Spain seems like it has examples for you to read on, electing officers and such, not officers appointed by a hierarchy the common soldier had no say in creating.
Second paragraph is meant for
My fucking ethernet cord came unplugged, must be a sign to gtfo
I am too lazy to get around the word filter in a subtle way.
The USSR was literally the only country that sent aid on a major scale to the Spanish Republic. Keep in mind that it wasn’t merely a civil war but also a flat-out invasion of Spain by the fascist powers.
It was also the only country that said that it was not the time for revolution and they must work together with the bourgeoisie
Fuck off liberal
It meant people who unquestioningly spouted the CPSU party line, up to defending the intervention in Hungary and Czechoslovakia.
These days it refers to people who are essentially the same crew, those who uphold defense of the USSR as central to communism and still suck Stalin's ghostly dick a good quarter of a century after that state collapsed.
It's people who dress up like they're in the red army and still think that opposing NATO imperialism holds primacy above all else when the Warsaw Pact is gone and BRICS, it's primary rival in the modern day, are other capitalist imperialists.
He's right about traps not being gay though
Wow the one word that’s guaranteed to get under everyone’s skin on 8ch, Liberal.
Come up with original insults next time.
As opposed to socialist imperialists?
As opposed to people who take more nuanced analysis of global politics. The knee jerk anti-Americanism might have made sense back in the day when the void would likely been filled by the USSR, but these days we're looking at different brands of capitalist imperialism.
In addition, socialists should realize that, at least of this moment, we have no real power and no ability to affect the outcome of geopolitical conflict. Whatever stance you take, it's purely propaganda. So, for instance, supporting right-wing dictators or Islamic fundamentalists makes no fucking sense for a socialist party in the Year of Our Lord 2017 because it will only serve to make you look like a loon to people who might otherwise be sympathetic to your politics.
It was tanks of the Soviet Army that curb stomped the Nazis in Berlin. Also it was NATO that broke up Yugoslavia and is the sword the USA uses for world domination, just like the Nationale Volksarmee predicted the USA would in the 1983.
And this is your problem. The 20th century ended. The Soviet Union collapsed. The whole USSR vs USA thing is null and void, and socialists should recognize this.
GDR military intelligence in 1983 predicted the USA would solve its crisis of capital through world domination, how is that not reliant now? Why shouldn't we view NATO in the same light the Warsaw Pact did, when NATO did exactly what the Warsaw Pact feared?
Imagine being this delusional. Knee-jerk anti-Soviets are just as bad as the knee-jerk Soviet defenders, in fact their much worse because they repeat the cherished lies of the Western bourgeoisie and their client states.
This is new knowledge for me, can you give some insight?
Wow, my dude. What a story.
That still has no bearing on modern politics in the modern day.
Military History Visualized did a video on it, here is a edited webm of the relevant bits.
This is too much
The Soviet Union was purposely dismantled by anti-communists against the democratic wishes of its population. Not even liberals expected it to end, hence collapse is non-nonsensical.
It underwent a political crisis and dissolved. You can speculate why that happened, but it happened.
T'was also the Soviet Army that crushed the Velvet revolution, and the Soviet state that demanded reparations from eastern european countries, ruining their economies instead of helping them like the USA did with the west.
2. over a dozen US military bases in Syria
Right but right after it dissolved the USA started working on the Project for a New American Century. This is a important fact about NATO, it started to expanded the second the Warsaw Pact officially dissolved where it expanded into east Germany and into Yugoslavia shortly after that.