It’s not like they’re secret.They used to be public on the gittea repository. Can’t find the link post federation tho
It’s not like they’re secret.They used to be public on the gittea repository. Can’t find the link post federation tho
I have only seen it used in reference to people who support dictatorial regimes with socialist aesthetics, mostly MLs.
yet to see an anarchist be called a tankie
https://hexbear.net/post/214901
https://hexbear.net/post/374789
https://hexbear.net/post/126901
There’s more in the_dunk_tank if you’re willing to dig
https://hexbear.net/c/the_dunk_tank
Pro Tip: Sort by Top All. Anarchists getting called tankie tends to get a lot of upbears because we have anarchist comrades on our instance. We’re a left unity instance
I love how you guys have decided that your definitions are the only correct ones.
You’re strawmaning hard here, because I never said it’s a definition or that it’s the only one. It’s just my understanding of the term. What part of it is wrong in your opinion? I want to consider it
It’s your primary weapon here, for obvious reasons.
Because it’s obvious that when you’re challenged on your understanding of words you have nothing to say?
Too bad instances can’t defederate HB.
Can you please elaborate?
They seem to not understand that they’re tankies.
Tankie is a social construct and is used to lazily discredit everyone to the left of bernie. It functions to libs the same way as “woke” functions for chuds. As a term it’s basically meaningless to anyone outside of the internet.
I hope I don’t sound rude but it really sounds like you only consider WaPo trustworthy when it’s convenient for you.
Is it really that hard to consider context?
Thoughtexperiment: You have a neo-nazi outlet having two reports. One is citing high ranking fascists talking about problems in their organization spilling insider knowledge that no other outlet wrote about. A second report is on ethnic and sexual minorities. Would you consider these two reports to be of the same value or would you “consider one of them when convenient for you”? (Don’t actually read Nazi outlets obv)
Besides, the media in China are heavily controlled by the government. I don’t think a news outlet would survive if they dared to report such things.
I said for the source to be equivalent. Ofc you can cite a western source, but I’ll read it like its a neo-nazi rag writing about ethnic minorities aka it being heavily biased
Also just an fyi there are Chinese outlets reporting on Xinjiang…
Sorry, I don’t understand how that makes this any less trustworthy
Please read up on Adrian Zenz, read about the methodology and the report on Xinjiang itself and think if it’s not suspensious that every western outlet cites him (or military funded think Tanks like ASPI) and his very thin findings
Also here’s an QA with Zenz https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dwy7KE7WoNo (The non cringy edit is hard to find, I wonder why that is)
No offence but your lack of media literacy is showing…
You understand that using WaPo as a source for American wrong doings is not the same as using WaPo as a source for wrong doings it’s geopolitical rival. You’d need a Chinese outlet admitting to their faults for it to be equivalent…
Nonetheless I clicked on your link:
The disclosure comes in an investigative report from the Associated Press and a new research report by scholar Adrian Zenz for the Jamestown Foundation.
Literally the second paragraph…
farmers who own their lands,
which burned their crop because they didn’t want to collectivize causing food shortages
and workers who want unions independent of the state,
which were ultimately used by the west (solidarnośc)
and political dissidents,
Unlike any other country
and a thousand other groups
No u
the bourgeoisie and their running dogs.
Uh oh someone sounds upset
Thank you for your valuable comment
This can be interpreted as bad faith if you don’t mention towards whom this behavior is directed at.
Thank you for admitting it’s about the optics (which is not a concern for us)