The Panthers were pretty explicitly pro-China, pro-Vietnam, and pro-DPRK. That alone is enough for them to be smeared as “tankies” by Western so-called leftists.
Black Panthers supported community defense, being a community defense group themselves, and that’s not exactly on brand for Tankies.
It’s almost like it’s a snarl word that doesn’t actually mean anything and so can be deployed and retracted as required. Eldridge Cleaver explicitly described the Panthers as a vanguard in “on the ideology of the black panther party”, and I put it to you that if you read that, or any of the other literature written by highly ranked members of the BPP, it would never occur to you that they are anything but “tankies”. Unless of course you already knew it was by the BPP, who unfortunately now fall into Lenin’s category of great revolutionaries who were slandered in their lifetime but who are now canonized and their ideas bastardised to mollify the masses.
it would never occur to you that they are anything but “tankies”
Well, I heard them advocate alot for people defending their own communities and didn’t hear them advocate at all for invading neighboring communities and forcing them to accept their form of socialism at gun point. Thus they have not met the definition of Tankie
Literally the first thing the Black Panthers would do if they managed to seize control of Oakland, Chicago, or any of the other cities they were gaining a lot of support in would be to build up forces and invade neighboring population centers to liberate prisons, de-occupy Black communities, and bring industry into their control to eventually sustain a full scale civil war effort. You understand that, right? Just because their revolution didn’t happen doesn’t mean that they weren’t ready to go and kill a lot of people to make these things happen.
But didn’t they wholeheartedly endorse those AES countries that did exactly the stuff you’re criticizing?
And Eldridge Cleaver, a prominent Black Panther Party leader and its “information minister,” publicly defended the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia. He literally visited Moscow after it happened in 1968, endorsed the tanks, and criticized the Soviets for even letting Czechoslavakia start liberalizing and de-communism-izing in the first place. Other Black Panthers didn’t really say much about Hungary or Czechoslavakia, since it largely wasn’t relevant to the things they were doing.
They explicitly called themselves vanguardist. That is the specific aspect of Marxism-Leninism that people who complain about “tankies” describe as
advocat(ing) … for invading neighboring communities and forcing them to accept their form of socialism at gun point.
Again, if I gave you a bunch of anonymized quotes, one from a principled member of the BPP and the other from “tankies”, you would not in a million years be able to pick out the panther, because they are exactly the kind of people who get smeared as “tankies”. It’s also very telling that you talk about a “definition of tankie” but didn’t actually give one, despite the lack of a definition being explicitly what we are talking about.
Here’s an anti-Stalinist “socialist” newspaper from the time of the Soviet intervention in Czechoslovakia, scroll down a bit and you’ll find the stuff about the Black Panther Party and Eldridge Cleaver being tankies
If the black panther party weren’t tankies, the term is truly meaningless. They were explicitly, openly Marxist-Leninist, an ideology you may know as “Stalinism”.
Marxists aren’t “brutalizing workers into accepting socialism.” This is a copium answer from people who can’t understand that socialism exists in real life, and is genuinely liberating for the working classes.
Marxism-Leninism doesn’t mean “violence against the working classes to enforce political dogma.” “Tankie” itself just means “supports existing socialism,” which the Black Panther Party absolutely did, even having a relationship with the CPC and DPRK.
Would Black Panthers endorsing the Soviets actions in Czechoslovakia count them as tankies? Or do all Tankies have to endorse the earlier invasion of Hungary, disqualifying both many of them and a number of us Hexbears?
I think you just might not know that much about the Black Panther Party, and Marxism-Leninism, as you think you do. Tankie is just a term people use willy-nilly to smear their opponents who generally hold the correct opinion, and I see it regularly deployed against people who opposed both invasions, and are anarchists. Many people on .world have claimed that .db0 is a tankie instance, despite them all being anarchists, mostly because they hold some bog standard socialist opinions.
I’ve never heard of Black Panthers advocating for Violence against the working class to enforce political dogma so calling them Tankies is a stretch.
The Panthers were pretty explicitly pro-China, pro-Vietnam, and pro-DPRK. That alone is enough for them to be smeared as “tankies” by Western so-called leftists.
It’s almost like their early fund raising was selling Mao’s little red book to college students.
Black Panthers supported community defense, being a community defense group themselves, and that’s not exactly on brand for Tankies.
It’s almost like it’s a snarl word that doesn’t actually mean anything and so can be deployed and retracted as required. Eldridge Cleaver explicitly described the Panthers as a vanguard in “on the ideology of the black panther party”, and I put it to you that if you read that, or any of the other literature written by highly ranked members of the BPP, it would never occur to you that they are anything but “tankies”. Unless of course you already knew it was by the BPP, who unfortunately now fall into Lenin’s category of great revolutionaries who were slandered in their lifetime but who are now canonized and their ideas bastardised to mollify the masses.
Well, I heard them advocate alot for people defending their own communities and didn’t hear them advocate at all for invading neighboring communities and forcing them to accept their form of socialism at gun point. Thus they have not met the definition of Tankie
Literally the first thing the Black Panthers would do if they managed to seize control of Oakland, Chicago, or any of the other cities they were gaining a lot of support in would be to build up forces and invade neighboring population centers to liberate prisons, de-occupy Black communities, and bring industry into their control to eventually sustain a full scale civil war effort. You understand that, right? Just because their revolution didn’t happen doesn’t mean that they weren’t ready to go and kill a lot of people to make these things happen.
But didn’t they wholeheartedly endorse those AES countries that did exactly the stuff you’re criticizing?
And Eldridge Cleaver, a prominent Black Panther Party leader and its “information minister,” publicly defended the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia. He literally visited Moscow after it happened in 1968, endorsed the tanks, and criticized the Soviets for even letting Czechoslavakia start liberalizing and de-communism-izing in the first place. Other Black Panthers didn’t really say much about Hungary or Czechoslavakia, since it largely wasn’t relevant to the things they were doing.
https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/bulletin/v05n02-w091-sept-16-1968-Bulletin.pdf Here’s an anti-Stalinist “socialist” newspaper from the time, scroll down a bit and you’ll find the stuff about the Black Panther Party and Eldridge Cleaver.
They explicitly called themselves vanguardist. That is the specific aspect of Marxism-Leninism that people who complain about “tankies” describe as
Again, if I gave you a bunch of anonymized quotes, one from a principled member of the BPP and the other from “tankies”, you would not in a million years be able to pick out the panther, because they are exactly the kind of people who get smeared as “tankies”. It’s also very telling that you talk about a “definition of tankie” but didn’t actually give one, despite the lack of a definition being explicitly what we are talking about.
Marxism-Leninism absolutely supports community defense.
Removed by mod
Nope, the MLs that ran the soviet union liberated the working classes.
As always, what these western, “anti-tankie” “communists” actually have a problem with is any communist actually being successful.
Every time.
https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/bulletin/v05n02-w091-sept-16-1968-Bulletin.pdf
Here’s an anti-Stalinist “socialist” newspaper from the time of the Soviet intervention in Czechoslovakia, scroll down a bit and you’ll find the stuff about the Black Panther Party and Eldridge Cleaver being tankies
If the black panther party weren’t tankies, the term is truly meaningless. They were explicitly, openly Marxist-Leninist, an ideology you may know as “Stalinism”.
Most Tankies are MLs but not every ML is a Tankie.
So it’s a meaningless term. Good to know.
“Tankie” is just a pejorative for “supports existing socialism.” It means absolutely nothing of substance.
Removed by mod
Marxists aren’t “brutalizing workers into accepting socialism.” This is a copium answer from people who can’t understand that socialism exists in real life, and is genuinely liberating for the working classes.
fuck yeah love too have no idea what words mean
Marxism-Leninism doesn’t mean “violence against the working classes to enforce political dogma.” “Tankie” itself just means “supports existing socialism,” which the Black Panther Party absolutely did, even having a relationship with the CPC and DPRK.
Would Black Panthers endorsing the Soviets actions in Czechoslovakia count them as tankies? Or do all Tankies have to endorse the earlier invasion of Hungary, disqualifying both many of them and a number of us Hexbears?
I think you just might not know that much about the Black Panther Party, and Marxism-Leninism, as you think you do. Tankie is just a term people use willy-nilly to smear their opponents who generally hold the correct opinion, and I see it regularly deployed against people who opposed both invasions, and are anarchists. Many people on .world have claimed that .db0 is a tankie instance, despite them all being anarchists, mostly because they hold some bog standard socialist opinions.