this post was submitted on 05 Feb 2026
47 points (96.1% liked)

MeanwhileOnGrad

2143 readers
11 users here now

"Oh, this is calamity! Calamity! Oh no, he's on the floor!"

Welcome to MoG!


Meanwhile On Grad


Documenting hate speech, conspiracy theories, apologia/revisionism, and general tankie behaviour across the fediverse. Memes are welcome!


What is a Tankie?


Alternatively, a detailed blog post about Tankies.

(caution of biased source)


Basic Rules:

Sh.itjust.works Instance rules apply! If you are from other instances, please be mindful of the rules. — Basically, don't be a dick.

Hate-Speech — You should be familiar with this one already; practically all instances have the same rules on hate speech.

Apologia(Using the Modern terminology for Apologia) No Defending, Denying, Justifying, Bolstering, or Differentiating authoritarian acts or endeavours, whether it be a Pro-CCP viewpoint, Stalinism, Islamic Terrorism or any variation of Tankie Ideology.

Revisionism — No downplaying or denying atrocities past and present. Calling Tankies shills, foreign/federal agents, or bots also falls under this rule. Extremists exist. They are real. Do not call them shills or fake users, as it handwaves their extremism.

Off-topic Discussion — Do not discuss unrelated topics to the point of derailing the thread. Stay focused on the direct content of the post, rather than engaging in arguments that lack mutual agreement.

Brigading/Trolling — If you're here because this community was linked in another thread, please refrain from maliciously voting, commenting, or manipulating the post in any way. This includes alt accounts. All votes are public, and if you are found to be brigading, you will be banned. Good-faith and honest communication is an exception.

Tankies can explain their views, but may be criticised or challenged for them. Any minor infraction of the rules may result in a warning and possibly a temporary ban.

You'll be warned if you're violating the instance and community rules. Continuing poor behaviour after being warned will result in a ban or removal of your comments. Bans typically last only 24 hours, but each subsequent infraction doubles the duration. Depending on the content, the ban time may be increased. You may request an unban at any time.


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Glide@lemmy.ca 24 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I've seen some incredibly stupid Tankie takes around here, but this might be the most completely dissassociated, idiotic trash I have ever seen come out of any of their mouths. It is the picture of "our heroic adventurers; their british invadwrs" meme.

"Both Imperialist genocides were bad." "We elevated the native peoples (when we destroyed their cultures and killed anyone who resisted); you're denying genocide."

Anyone who reads that comment and doesn't immediately smell the hypocritical bullshit needs help, either developing critical thinking skills, or getting away from the brainwashing they've consumed.

[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 month ago

The most important thing to note about Tankies is that they are unapologetically authoritarians, they operate entirely on a strongman principle. They will never question themselves or their strongmen. this is why they're sometimes called red fash, since they're really not that different from fascists.

[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Remember, when tankies refer to communism, they don't actually give a shit about communist ideals, but instead authoritarian ideals. They tend to ignore that the USSR and Nazi Germany signed a non-aggression pact when they both invaded Poland.

Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and the Soviet Union all share authoritarianism. They aren't direct opposites.

[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 month ago

also not a good look coopting proto-fascist slogans like TDS

[–] Saledovil@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 month ago

The Molotov-Ribbentrop pact wasn't just a non-aggression pact. They carved out eastern Europe into spheres of influence.

[–] PugJesus@piefed.social 14 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

"Genocide denial is when you acknowledge genocide that isn't done by The West(tm)"

It's 'funny' that this is the same line of thinking deployed by fascist rhetoric all around the world for the past century.

"Racism is when you acknowledge racism"

"Sexism is when you acknowledge sexism"

"Fascism is when you acknowledge fascism"

[–] blackn1ght@feddit.uk 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Let's just forget about the Holodomor genocide killing millions of Ukrainians, and Poland, the Baltics and East Germany being kept prisoners.

[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Funnily enough they do forget about the Holodomor! they say it never happened, and if it did happen, then it was good

[–] TanteRegenbogen@feddit.org 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Pretty much like nazis on the Holocaust.

[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago

Identical. Even their memes are the same.

'6 million ovens!'

'big spoons!'

Genocide is a joke to them.

[–] GuyIncognito@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Comparing the Soviet famine of the 30s to the Holocaust is blatant Holocaust revisionism, which is clearly what the word "holodomor" was coined to do. You should use a different term

[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Comparisons don't magically change the holocaust. Both were genocides, that's the point.

There's no revision going on here

[–] GuyIncognito@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago (10 children)

Comparing the all time number one genocide to something that isn't a genocide is Holocaust denial

[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

I avoid quantifying genocide since it can happen in all sorts of ways against all sorts of people. 100,000 dead aboriginals are still as bad as 6 million jews. Genocide is bad, regardless of how many are killed.

Why do you doubt that the Holodomor was a genocide? Either way, the Holodomor was man-made and an atrocity perpetrated by Stalin's government.

[–] GuyIncognito@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The famine hit all the major grain producing regions of the USSR, not just Ukraine, so it was awfully unspecific for being a targeted act of genocide.

They were exporting grain to fund their program of rapid industrialization, there was a crop failure, and they still exported the grain. Once it became clear to the Soviet government that there was a famine, they reversed course, but the damage was done. This was callous, an atrocity even, but it does not constitute genocide. The idea that it was a genocide was concocted by Ukrainian nationalist exiles (themselves SS veterans) after the war and used to equivocate Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia for cold war propaganda.

[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Thanks for posting in here. It's extremely rare for a tankie to actually venture to be challenged.

So first, the grain quotas were impossible to meet, and Ukraine specifically was targeted. Ukrainian villages were blacklisted, with food seizures, trade bans and other sorts of blockades. Once starvation began, Ukraine's borders were forcefully closed to stop peasants from fleeing, that's not something you do in a legitimate famine. This was also all during the time of suppressing Ukraine's culture. The fact that the policies were not applied uniformly across the USSR is what makes it a genocide.

They also didn't reverse course, they knew the starvation was occurring and continued it anyway, even continuing grain requisitions despite the famine. Literally stealing from the starving.

When it comes to genocide, we usually refer to the UN Genocide Convention, which is what we do for Palestine. Stalin saw the Ukranian nationalism as a threat and used the famine as a means of subjugation. The combined starvation, border closures, and ongoing dismantling of Ukrainian culture all indicate that it was a destructive intent towards Ukrainians as a national group. Either way, it's still an atrocity, and the USSR's response was morally wrong and led to many deaths.

It's also wild that you're holding Ukrainian peasants accountable as SS veterans when the Ukrainian émigrés were contesting famine conditionsin the 1930s, before WW2. Starvation and famine aren't something that just magically happens, it's gradual. And even if there were exiles, you don't starve peasants who have been on the land for generations.

Regardless, millions died, the state seized grain during starvation, restricted movement and trapped starving peasants and oppressed Ukrainian culture. Ukraine considers it to be a genocide, and so do many other nations.

Why do you doubt this?

[–] GuyIncognito@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

No problem! Actually, I'm not specifically one of the "tankies" you're contending with. I only recently registered on this site and was not previously aware of the beef between lemmy.ml and lemmy.world (I myself coming by way of lemmy.ca), though you can consider me to be aligned with the former ideologically.

The idea that the famine constituted a genocide is not a settled matter among serious historians - it isn't just Grover Furr (author of Blood Lies: The Evidence That Every Accusation Against Joseph Stalin And The Soviet Union In Timothy Snyder's Bloodlands Is False and Khrushchev Lied: The Evidence that Every "revelation" of Stalin's (and Beria's) "crimes" in Nikita Khrushchev's Infamous "secret Speech" to the 20th Party Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union on February 25, 1956, is Provably False) that contests it. I would argue that (aside from the aforementioned Grover Furr and presumably some Russian historians) the "constitutes genocide" side is the more heavily politicized.

A lot of scholarship regarding the Soviet famine as a genocide has come out of the University of Alberta's Canadian Institute for Ukrainian Studies (CIUS), which makes sense given that Alberta has Canada's highest concentration of Ukrainian-Canadians. What was often overlooked until recently is that the U of A chancellor from 1982 to 1986 and co-founder of the CIUS, Peter Savaryn, was an SS veteran, having volunteered for the 14th Waffen SS Division 'Galizien', and that a lot of scholarship coming out of the U of A has served to whitewash the 14th SS and paint it as a group of Ukrainian freedom fighters. In actuality, the 14th SS spent most of its time on anti-partisan actions, including the suppression of the Slovak National Uprising. The Galician division would not have experienced the famine, as Galicia was controlled by Poland before the war.

You're probably balking at the mention of Nazis point since Putin poisoned the well on this discussion by invading Ukraine under the pretext of "denazification", but this is real history. The Ukrainian-Canadian community's particular problem stems from the importation of Waffen SS veterans, particularly the 14th SS, after the war. The reason we did this comes down to cold war politics - the Ukrainian-Canadian community before and during the war was very left wing, operating Ukrainian Labour Temples across the country, with the Ukrainian Labour Hall in Winnipeg was being during the general strike of 1919 as a meeting place and printing house for the strikers. The government imported the nationalists as a locus reliable anticommunists after the war in order to effect a hostile takeover of the Ukrainian-Canadian community, and suppress the left more broadly. Following the war, imported Ukrainian nationalists attacked Ukrainian Labour Temples and disrupted meetings, culminating in the 1950 bombing of the Ukrainian Labour Temple in Toronto during a Thanksgiving concert. The operators of the labour temple, the Association of United Ukrainian Canadians (AUUC), blamed imported SS veterans for the bombing, while the competing nationalist organization, the Ukrainian Canadian Congress (UCC) claimed that the AUUC bombed themselves as a false-flag.

Long story short, the plan was successful. The UCC became the leading Ukrainian-Canadian organization, while the AUUC declined amidst cold war suppression of anyone associated with communism. The Ukrainian-Canadian community became reliably nationalist and anticommunist, and SS veterans like Savaryn became leading figures. It is in this milieu that the idea that the famine was a "terror famine" developed.

There was an inquiry into the importation of SS veterans in 1985 - the conclusion was that the 14th SS was cleared of all wrongdoing, and contravening the decision of the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, the Galician division was not a criminal organization. The rest of the report was sealed, and the government has to this day refused to unseal it. Why would they refuse to release the full report if the SS veterans were so innocent? Because it would reveal that they imported SS veterans on purpose to suppress the left, and that many leading figures in the Ukrainian-Canadian community were Nazi war criminals. Aside from the embarrassment this would cause the government, it would have also undermined anticommunist propaganda efforts.

Back to the famine itself, Stalin and his government don't come out squeaky-clean of course. They were extremely paranoid about kulaks hoarding grain and resisting collectivization, and in that air of paranoia and oppression, nobody enforcing the grain quotas was going to disobey orders. People starved and died needlessly, but once the famine ended, it ended. This doesn't constitute genocide, let alone an equivalent to the Holocaust. The idea that it was equivalent to the Holocaust, the "double genocide theory", is used by various eastern European nationalists to whitewash their participation in the Holocaust - the most extreme end of it has Lithuanian nationalists claiming that they were only retaliating against the "Judeo-Bolshevists" when they killed 95% of Lithuania's Jewish population, a rate unsurpassed in any other country.

Stalin made a lot of mistakes, but the crimes of his opponents, not only the Nazis themselves but the imperialist powers, were so much worse and numerous that Stalin's crimes pale in comparison. All in, Joe Steel did more good than bad.

[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Before I bother to reply, I must check, just to set some ground here.

Do you agree that Stalin's soviet leadership was aware by 1932 of the mass starvation conditions occurring in Ukraine and other regions?

[–] GuyIncognito@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Do you agree that the grain requisitions and movement restrictions of starving peasants continued even though the leadership was aware of the conditions?

[–] GuyIncognito@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

It's hard to say definitively - one of the issues in the Stalinist USSR was information feedback. There were strong incentives to exaggerating production numbers, and strong disincentives to reporting shortfalls. Basically, everyone in a position of power was terrified and covering their ass at all times.

What it ultimately comes down to, I think, is crash-industrialization. Stalin believed that the USSR needed to industrialize as soon as possible, with all other concerns (i.e. lives) being secondary. To his credit, this ended up being a spot-on assessment. Supposing they had a kinder leader rather than Stalin with his heart of steel, and they industrialized more slowly, collectivized agriculture more slowly and voluntarily, how would they have fared in WW2? It's possible that the USSR would have been unprepared for an industrial war and the Germans would have won, in which case there would have been hundreds of millions of deaths.

[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

Do you agree that continuing food requisition from starving regions increased the number of deaths?

[–] GuyIncognito@lemmy.ca 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I shall not continue in this Socratic dialogue if you continue to ignore my arguments.

[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 weeks ago (1 children)

I'm not. You think industrialisation was above life.

[–] GuyIncognito@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

I didn't say that, though Stalin certainly thought it. It also worked, given that they survived WW2.

[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] GuyIncognito@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

That's an exaggeration. He was 70% good, 30% bad.

[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

wild to call any dictator good.

what was bad about him?

[–] GuyIncognito@lemmy.ca 1 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

Not really. Plenty of democratically elected leaders are bad, why can't some dictators be good? Gaddafi was pretty good, given the alternatives. Fidel Castro was good. Democratic leaders are also usually nowhere near as democratic as they're made out to be, (nor are dictators often as dictatorial), so the line is much blurrier than you might think.

As for Stalin, he purged a lot of people that didn't need purging, he had Beria as the NKVD head, he made the famine worse than it could have been, he supported the creation of the state of Israel, and he withheld support for the communists during the Greek civil war in order to maintain good relations with the west. There's other stuff that I can't think of off the top of my head.

[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (22 children)

Dictators are bad because they have complete power, they can't be removed by the populace without violent bloodshed.

load more comments (22 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[–] bearboiblake@pawb.social 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That "well actually" comment is kinda obnoxious as fuck considering the USSR is gone while Amerisrael is currently undertaking a genocide in Palestine, tankies are fucking stupid for trying to defend the USSR all the time like this though.

[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago

I believe the point is that imperialism comes in all shades.

[–] fox2263@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

That Cowbee fella is considered lie a saint over there

[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

He is. It's funny how they circlejerk themselves about how much of a debatelord he is.

Thing is that anyone who actually challenges him is immediately and swiftly banned and their comments removed entirely. Convenient.

[–] fox2263@lemmy.world 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

And he just info-dumps them and forces his argument without even considering the opposing ideal because he is right and you are wrong. Not only wrong, but ideologically different. He is ultra left and everyone else is to the “right”. Russia is right wing yet he seems to never disparage them.

[–] goat@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

His method of debate is gish-gallop, where he just spams a bunch of blatantly biased sources and expects you to go through every single one of them. If you do challenge, he'll report you to the tankie mods or admins, and they'll immediately ban you and remove your comments.

I've challenged him a few times and every single time, he's needed a mod to bail him out.

Tankies can't argue. It's because their beliefs aren't based in reality; they have to rely on conspiracy and whataboutism.

[–] TanteRegenbogen@feddit.org 4 points 1 month ago

"That is CIA propaganda!!!1!!" They would say if they were here right now.

[–] fox2263@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

Sadly I tried and failed to debate him, I didn’t have enough intrinsic knowledge to combat him. But I knew in my heart I was right 😂

load more comments
view more: next ›