The officially recognized definition of a Tankie is one who is a strong supporter of communism. Which, I think we all agree is considered a “left” wing ideal.
It’s also strongly authoritarian, but it’s solidly in the authoritarian left. So people calling others “Tankies” are, in theory, more right-wing than the people they’re insulting. It’s a left-punching insult.
Usually these people are strong supporters of China and the old Soviet Union and are staunch critics of ‘imperialist’ nations such as Britain and the USA.
They’re supporters of authoritarian dictatorships. Which is distinct from, and frankly incompatible with, the ideals of Communism.
There are definitely those who decided that communism wasn’t what it was, at took the label for themselves to try and fool their constituencies into believing their dictatorships were “for the best”… but they were never ideologically communist.
I wouldn’t say they’re strong supporters of communism per se, rather they’re attracted to the material trappings of communism. It’s red aesthetic fetishization.
Tankies aren’t monolithic, but the fact that so many of them idealize the modern-day imperialist government of Russia (and its right-wing ideology) indicates that they are either misguided or insincere in their stated beliefs. Opposition to the West is given more priority than actual leftism, even if it means endorsing fascism. Putin’s Russia represents the closest extant mirror to the idea of the USSR, if not its ideology, so it is idealized as its inheritor rather than its antithesis.
Similar is seen with China and its modern-day embrace of globalism and capital, despite still ostensibly having a communist government. It’s all about the aesthetics of the revolution, original intent be damned.
I mean, it really depends on the qualities that you utilize to define “leftism”. The real delineation between the two is their organizational hierarchy and tolerance of authority. Not exactly sure how that is used to determine who’s more of a leftist.
organizational hierarchy and tolerance of authority
Yeah, the communist dictatorships where the government controlled everything and dictated all of everybody’s environment down from the national level are pretty light on organizational hierarchy and authoritarianism.
Again the level of authoritarianism isn’t definitional in a lot of interpretations of left vs right.
A lot of people claim it to be purely economic, socialism vs capitalism. In this interpretation there are authoritarian and libertarian leaning people on both the right and left.
You will find out that on purely economic terms, the communist countries are remarkably similar to the classical Fascist propositions. They were mostly just forward with the same changes, possibly because the Fascists were killed after WWII and didn’t have a lot of time to continue on the changes they started.
(But yes, maybe the Fascists would stop before reaching the same level, we can’t know that.)
One, there isn’t some governing body for the term “Tankie”.
Second, the definition of Tankie means supporting China and Russia (TODAY RUSSIA) only because of their authoritarian policies, regardless if it is anywhere adjacent to actual communism or not.
For example, many Tankies will support any action Russia takes (which we’ve seen with Ukraine) if it opposes “the west”. And no one can argue that modern Russia is even kind of communistic.
The officially recognized definition of a Tankie is one who is a strong supporter of communism. Which, I think we all agree is considered a “left” wing ideal.
It’s also strongly authoritarian, but it’s solidly in the authoritarian left. So people calling others “Tankies” are, in theory, more right-wing than the people they’re insulting. It’s a left-punching insult.
Usually these people are strong supporters of China and the old Soviet Union and are staunch critics of ‘imperialist’ nations such as Britain and the USA.
They’re supporters of authoritarian dictatorships. Which is distinct from, and frankly incompatible with, the ideals of Communism.
There are definitely those who decided that communism wasn’t what it was, at took the label for themselves to try and fool their constituencies into believing their dictatorships were “for the best”… but they were never ideologically communist.
I wouldn’t say they’re strong supporters of communism per se, rather they’re attracted to the material trappings of communism. It’s red aesthetic fetishization.
Tankies aren’t monolithic, but the fact that so many of them idealize the modern-day imperialist government of Russia (and its right-wing ideology) indicates that they are either misguided or insincere in their stated beliefs. Opposition to the West is given more priority than actual leftism, even if it means endorsing fascism. Putin’s Russia represents the closest extant mirror to the idea of the USSR, if not its ideology, so it is idealized as its inheritor rather than its antithesis.
Similar is seen with China and its modern-day embrace of globalism and capital, despite still ostensibly having a communist government. It’s all about the aesthetics of the revolution, original intent be damned.
I’m pretty sure between an anarchist and a tankie there should be no question who leans further left and it ain’t the tankie
I mean, it really depends on the qualities that you utilize to define “leftism”. The real delineation between the two is their organizational hierarchy and tolerance of authority. Not exactly sure how that is used to determine who’s more of a leftist.
Yeah, the communist dictatorships where the government controlled everything and dictated all of everybody’s environment down from the national level are pretty light on organizational hierarchy and authoritarianism.
Again the level of authoritarianism isn’t definitional in a lot of interpretations of left vs right.
A lot of people claim it to be purely economic, socialism vs capitalism. In this interpretation there are authoritarian and libertarian leaning people on both the right and left.
You will find out that on purely economic terms, the communist countries are remarkably similar to the classical Fascist propositions. They were mostly just forward with the same changes, possibly because the Fascists were killed after WWII and didn’t have a lot of time to continue on the changes they started.
(But yes, maybe the Fascists would stop before reaching the same level, we can’t know that.)
They are certainly not Right Wing though.
One, there isn’t some governing body for the term “Tankie”.
Second, the definition of Tankie means supporting China and Russia (TODAY RUSSIA) only because of their authoritarian policies, regardless if it is anywhere adjacent to actual communism or not.
For example, many Tankies will support any action Russia takes (which we’ve seen with Ukraine) if it opposes “the west”. And no one can argue that modern Russia is even kind of communistic.