this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2026
1373 points (95.7% liked)
Lemmy Shitpost
36882 readers
4005 users here now
Welcome to Lemmy Shitpost. Here you can shitpost to your hearts content.
Anything and everything goes. Memes, Jokes, Vents and Banter. Though we still have to comply with lemmy.world instance rules. So behave!
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means:
-No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that is NSFW should be behind NSFW tags.
-Content that might be distressing should be kept behind NSFW tags.
...
If you see content that is a breach of the rules, please flag and report the comment and a moderator will take action where they can.
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
1.Memes
10.LinuxMemes (Linux themed memes)
Reach out to
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules. Striker
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Those in control of the USA are internationalists, too.
They don't care who "wins", they profit off of the war itself (and the rebuild for that matter).
They love tankies
Then why would they love tankies, some of the only people who consistently oppose them building and using tanks?
can't have war if everyone surrenders too soon.
Exactly.
There's only one war worth fighting and that's the class war. Everything else is just throwing lives away for nothing.
Tankies are "authoritarian communists", they are not pro peace in any way, they love tanks.
(standard definition, not familiar with the tankies that you describe)
Bedtimes are authoritarian, your parents are dictators
My parents are dead! (runs out of room crying, slams door)
did they head out on a guilt trip and never come back
One day you'll be an adult and you can set your own bedtime. Now who wants to go out for Ice Cream 🍨?
Really? Because I'm always calling for staying out of conflicts and dramatically reducing the military budget and people are constantly calling me a tankie because of those stances.
See, if you don't want war, it means you support the other side, and however bad "our" side is, the other side is always worse and more aggressive (the media says so, after all) and that means that anyone who's pro-peace is actually pro-war, freedom is slavery, etc.
So it was when I said we shouldn't invade Iraq and Afghanistan, it meant that I was "a terrorist sympathizer" and "pro-Al Qaida," and when I say we should stay out of Palestine, people say I'm "pro-Hamas" and when I say we should stay out of Ukraine people say I'm "pro-Russia" and a "tankie," and if I don't think the US has the right to kidnap heads of state I'm "supporting dictators." Consistently advocating against the use of tanks is essentially the defining characteristic of a "tankie."
Yes, really! I've been called a tankie and a Nazi and worse. Don't judge what a tankie or Nazi is by insults on the internet, hyperbole and bullshit rule.
Again, your definition is not the standard definition. Tankies love tanks. And Communism. And Stalin. Which is funny, because Stalin wasn't much of a communist.
I use the standard definition, that's it. I am not familiar with the tankies you describe, I haven't met them... Tankies hating tanks seems wrong to me. Back in the day when word originated they loved the T-34 tank and Russia in WW2 and so on.
Where can I find YOUR definition of "tankie", the peace loving gentle communist who hates tanks? Seriously? And what do you think the "tank" in "tankie" comes from?
Words are defined by common use. If the common use of the word "tankie" is to throw it at people who oppose war, then that's what it means now. You can say it's defined as being pro- war, but I've never seen it used that way.
Well sure, WWII is basically the go-to example of a necessary and justified war. There was a time in my life when I labelled myself as a pacifist and the counter-example that everyone always brought up was WWII.
At that time, my position was that that was one exception from like 70 years ago and we shouldn't make a rule from the exception considering how many unjustified wars have been fought since then. Now, my position is a little bit more flexible and moderate to account for that and a handful of other cases: now I say, "no war but class war," and WWII was a class war.
However, my position hasn't actually changed much in practice since those days. The vast majority of wars and violence are systemic and fought for bourgeois interests, so I still oppose them. Only very rarely does violence happen in the opposite direction, for example if we compare the death tolls of Luigi Mangione to Brian Thompson.
It comes from accusing people who oppose war of supporting the other side's tanks, as I just explained to you in my previous comment.
Indeed. And the common use of the word tankie is "authoritarian communist"
Why are you using an uncommon definition?
Why would you call someone who opposes tanks a "tankie"? Kinda silly.
That's like calling you a "warmongie".
OK, next time someone calls me a tankie, I'll just say, "Actually, I don't support sending tanks to Ukraine" and I'm sure that'll clear things up and convince them I'm not a tankie.
Well, that's just silly.
I didn't make the definition
This was how the term was first used in the 80s. As of today, the definition has expanded to all "authoritarian communists".
Nothing about peace yet, sorry.
What's silly about it? Tankie is when you support using tanks, I don't support using tanks in Ukraine so therefore I'm not a tankie. The people who want to send tanks to Ukraine are tankies.
Or we can recognize that that definition doesn't reflect how it's actually used. And the way it's actually used is generally towards people who promote peaceful, diplomatic solutions over military ones.
You sound much more of an isolationist than a tankie. Lol.
The word "isolationist" doesn't exist in the vocabularies of most people around here. It doesn't really matter why I disagree with US military interventions, the fact that I do means that I will inevitably be labelled tankie or a Russian bot. So you might as well ignore it, or love the word instead, cause you ain't done nothing if you ain't been called a Red.
Besides, I'm not wholly an isolationist. I have no problem with trade or foreign aid, so long as it isn't military aid. More accurately, I'm a dove. But "dove" doesn't exactly work as an insult. Some liberals even like to imagine that they're doves, unbelievably.
But again, liberals don't recognize that perspectives like "doves" or "isolationists" exist. You either follow the narrative of the media and politicians, or you get thrown into this big lump of Bad People™ with zero distinctions regarding why you disagree with them.
Isolationists would want to stay out of Ukraine to mind our own business, this guy wants to stay out of Ukraine because .ml is notorious for giving modern day Russia a free pass with their Imperial nonsense.
Case in point: Anyone who wants to stay out of conflicts automatically supports Russia. My actual reasons and motivations are totally irrelevant. Thank you for proving my point.
Your case would have a better point if Russia wasn't constantly creating conflicts.
Non sequitur.
War makes money
But tankies oppose nearly all wars.
Tankies seek to use state violence to coerce and terrorize the working class into unquestioning obedience to the state. Sometimes that violence is directed at the working class in other states so it's hard to argue they oppose war.
You're thinking of liberals.
Ok, fine, Tankies are a variant (ostensibly) of communists that seek to use state violence to coerce and terrorize the working class into unquestioning obedience to the state.
You're thinking of social democrats.
You're living in denial my dude
And as usual, you’re not thinking at all
Do you know what tanks are for?
Yes, that's why "tankies" are generally opposed to building and deploying tanks, moreso than just about any ideology short of pacifism. Certainly moreso than liberals are.
You don't even know the origin of the word "tankie".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungarian_Revolution_of_1956
Actually, I do. That's completely consistent with my point.
The people who coined the term wanted to take a more aggressive approach to dealing with the USSR. They were particularly concerned that tensions might deescalate due to the change of leadership from Stalin to Khrushchev and the explicit foreign policy approach of "peaceful coexistence" with the West (contrary to some strains of communist thought that had called for expanding the revolution to other countries). Those in the West who supported deescalation and refused to take a hard line in support of the Cold War were labelled as "tankies" for their insufficient hawkishness.
The Western leftists and peace advocates the term was created to condemn obviously had no control over the policies over the USSR. To the extent that they could influence the policies of their home countries, they pushed for deescalation, for building fewer tanks. It was the "anti-tankies" who wanted more tanks, as they always do.
But supported them
Not everyone the term was or has been applied to supported them. But regardless, they still used whatever influence they had to push for fewer tanks.
If I'm an American and I'm out protesting the Vietnam War, and I say that we should end the war and stop building tanks, and that the Vietnamese communists were justified in rising up against the colonizers, does that make me pro-war? Does it make me pro-tank? Is the "peaceful" stance the one that says the Vietnamese were not justified so the US should stay in the war? That's nonsense.
But that's the exact same logic you're applying here and everywhere else. If someone supported peace and deescalation with the USSR during the Cold War, then they'd be accused of supporting or not sufficiently condemning how they handled the Hungarian uprising. If someone opposes the war in Ukraine, they're accused of supporting or not sufficiently condemning Russia. If someone opposed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, they were accused of supporting or not sufficiently condemning 9/11 and Al Qaida. And so the peace advocates are always depicted as being violent, and it works the exact same way every single time. War is Peace.
At this point, I accept that it's always going to happen that way and that I'll always be "the bad guy" for opposing war. I used to be a "terrorist sympathizer," now I'm a "tankie" in another ten or twenty years, I'm sure I'll be some other horrible thing. Who cares.
But you don't. You subscribe to a pro-war, pro-colony ideology
Yes I do.
And you poop out of your mouth, see I can make shit up based on absolutely nothing too.
teehee you said poop
Not my fault this is the only level of discourse y'all are capable of. I tried to have an intelligent conversation with you, you just started slinging random insults based on nothing.
You're not an intellectual for blatantly posting misinformation.
Name one piece of misinformation I posted. You're just lobbing baseless insults again.
Having a different ideology or perspective from you is not misinformation. I said nothing that was factually inaccurate.
People kept telling me that the Taliban won the war in Afghanistan but I kept telling them the US Military Industrial complex won.
I agree with you! And as we speak, they are selling weapons to the Taliban, and selling weapons to whoever is fighting Taliban at the moment.
After there's nothing left but smoking rubble, the IMF (controlled by the same concerns) will give the winner a "loan." The winner won't be able to pay off those loans, so what will they do? Provide them with more loans to cover those loans. The interest is all profit, and the "loan" is never actual printed money in circulation and is "virtual money", so it costs them nothing. They collect all of that interest with no cost to themselves.
I'm simplifying, it's actually much worse than I describe. The more you investigate it, the worse it gets...
Right or left, all are getting screwed , "The Bank" doesn't care about politics.
If you're ever bored, check out JP Morgan, the man and the bank... just one cog in the machine.