Edit: Stop defending Tankies. If you are truly a Communist that doesnt support Russia and China, then defending the Tankies by letting them pretend ALL communists get called Tankies is only making you look bad by comparison. If Tankie was synonymous with communist, it wouldnt need to exist as a word.
2nd edit: I'm giving some of you WAAAYYY too much benefit of doubt but heres a further point, at the moment there is two options
1: You help clarify that Tankie means "Communist who Supports Authoritarian Regimes and their use of violences to suppress dissent" for people who are using the word incorrectly
or
2: You help create a smokescreen for Tankies to hide behind and let Tankie and Communist blur so Tankies can claim that all Communists get called that so the word means nothing. And if you are successful in that, the vast majority of us with great distaste for the Chinese and Russian goverment will just switch to telling ALL communists to fuck off because we certainly arent going to grow more tolerance for regimes that have no issues violently suppressing minorities
There is no 3rd option
Final Addition:
9 communists are sitting at a table when 1 Tankie decides to join the table. No one rejects the Tankie from sitting.
10 Tankies sit at a table
Yes but not because of their heterosexuality. It was usually nationality, ethnicity, religion, being "counterrevolutionary", or just because someone like lavrentiy baria didn't like you
ehhh, unfortunately I've met more than my fair share of people who unironically like Stalin.
Lots of actually good communist figures out there and they go out of their way to choose the homophobic drunk domestic abuser who kept a literal child rapist as his right-hand man.
I remember tankies telling on Reddit me how "Pushing for LGBT Rights is forcing Western ideals on non-Western people" and how "Putin killing the gays is good actually".... the Horse Shoe Theory is real
Well, the whole notion that things are on a spectrum is kind of false.
There are the people using what we know about the world right now to try to improve the conditions for all of us and who are willing to adjust course based on evidence and results, and then there are those clinging to failed notions of the past, whether it be an outdated philsophy from four hundred years ago or a failed theory from yesterday.
In that way it's more of a binary that does not care if you're anarchist, monarchist, communist, libertarian, democratic etc. If your ideas aren't working and you fail to admit they aren't working then you have become a conservative, regardless of how radical your idea was when it was concieved.
Yup, it's always "critical support" for any country with an adversarial relationship to the "imperial core" no matter how fucked up they are on human rights, or anything else.
It's never critical support for any of the "succdem" countries for their advances on human rights and social safety nets despite not moving towards socialism/communism, and then trying to get them moving in that direction.
Not that all or even most of the countries they support are actually moving towards socialism/communism either. The countries they list as AES (already existing socialism) make me think they have literal holes in their heads, like that guy that didn't realize he shot himself in the head with a nail gun for years.
They're good at quoting Marx but when it comes to who they support their only requirement is anti-western aligned countries, and they'll twist their brains into any knots necessary to invent a narrative to justify that support.
It's a very common thing for people to equate queerness with other concepts of otherness like "not from my group!" type pearl clutching. Bigots in a lot of places are weirdly more accepting of individual queer folks when they are noticeably foreign and more treat the concept of people being queer as an outside corrupting influence... Nevermind that the existence of queerness is basically a universal. People from non-permissive places really don't want to believe that their culture will also constantly manifest new queer people. They often believe something along the lines of if they stamp on it hard enough it becomes more rare instead of just more people hiding and struggling in isolation and silence often risking their lives if they misjudge a social situation or dying because of a pervasive sense of dispair.
But no matter how hard you stomp the "problem" never goes away. You have to keep stomping forever in perpetuity. The boot must always rest heavy on someone's neck and will never touch floor again because there will always be someone there to rise if the pressure ever stops. It's in part why the concept of people essentially just being "born that way" has been so powerful.
And to circle it to a common online debate, DC has its "Red Son" alternate continuity where the major divergence point is Kal-El's birthing matrix lands in Soviet territory rather than Kansas so there's a Superman born and raised wholly believing in the idealized theoretical form of communism rather than an idealized version of the US, do could get the "Goku vs Superman" argument going
The Soviet government of the Russian Soviet Republic (RSFSR) decriminalised homosexuality in December 1917, following the October Revolution and the discarding of the Legal Code of Tsarist Russia.
The legalisation of homosexuality was confirmed in the RSFSR Penal Code of 1922, and following its redrafting in 1926. According to Dan Healey, archival material that became widely available following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 "demonstrates a principled intent to decriminalize the act between consenting adults, expressed from the earliest efforts to write a socialist criminal code in 1918 to the eventual adoption of legislation in 1922.
Unlike Castro, Stalin never acknowledged it was wrong to do so. This is for two reasons: Castro lived long enough to see public opinion change, and Castro was psychologically capable of seeing he was wrong about something