this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2025
648 points (96.0% liked)
The Democratic People's Republic of Tankiejerk
1037 readers
141 users here now
Dunking on Tankies from a leftist, anti-capitalist perspective.
Rules:
- No bigotry of any kind.
- No tankies or right-wingers. Liberals are allowed so long as they are aware of this
- No genocide denial
We allow posts about tankie behavior even off fedi, shitposts, and rational, leftist discussion.
Curious about non-tankie leftism? If you've got a little patience for 19th century academic style, let a little Marx and Kropotkin be your primer!
Marx's Communist Manifesto, short and accessible! Highly recommended if you haven't read it
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
"Whataboutism" is one of the most prevalent logical fallacies. It never makes any sense.
If the much worse enemies of the USA have a lot to gain by the USA's downfall and are actively promoting said downfall, then it's not whataboutism to unmask them like a scooby doo villain.
Tankies don't give af about trans rights, Tankies don't give af about any human rights, Tankies don't want you to live and flourish in any capacity at all. Do not be fooled by their rhetoric all over Lemmy.
It's mostly from .ml in my experience, Hell, look at the goons spouting off against tgis post in these very comments. .ml
IMO, self respecting instances need to defederate from .ml so they are not so overrun by tankie clapping sealions... Just like with hexbear, they deserve to be silenced by social forces.
It's literally a crime to portray LGBT in Chinese media, they've been censoring it harder than ever recently.
Don't even get me started on Russia or Iran.
Another top contender is that all things with defects or drawbacks are equally horrible and unacceptable.
However it can be used to point out someone's hypocrisy. If country A is genociding people from country B, while screaming about people from country B genociding people from country C, "what about your genocide" is an appropriate response.
Calling out hypocrisy can be valid but it must further discussion, not shut it down. In your example, if country A is committing genocide while condemning country B for genocide, the problem isn't just country B’s actions. It's that country A is deflecting from its own crimes instead of addressing them.
Saying 'what about your genocide' only matters if it leads to accountability for both. If it's just used to avoid taking responsibility, then it's whataboutism. It shifts the focus without solving anything.
To reiterate, whataboutism is deflection meant to shut down further discussion.
Appealing to hypocrisy is a fallacy, full stop. Someone can be a hypocrite but that has no bearing on whether an action is justifiable for both/neither.
The infallabile "ha, gotcha" fallacy