First: I don’t consider the term “Tankie” nebulous because I only apply it to people who self-identify as such.
Similarly, I don’t go around bringing up authoritarianism. When someone else brings it up to defend it, I generally roll my eyes and move along.
Personally, I find this line of reasoning about definitions semantic in the least productive way. It’s just Loki’s Wager. So with all due respect, I don’t wish to debate you. I answered your question in good faith and I’m content to leave it at that.
I think you’re running into a problem, though. You may not call anyone a tankie unless they call themselves one, but my point is that the group commonly called tankies does exist. People argue over what the definition of a tankie actually is, but people aren’t arguing over what this group is, and that’s what we have to work with. Tankies are essentially people that support socialist states, and authoritarianism isn’t a particularly useful word in discussing shortcomings or successes of these states. It isn’t a meaningful signifier of anything different from capitalist states, because there’s little objectivity to its use.
First: I don’t consider the term “Tankie” nebulous because I only apply it to people who self-identify as such.
Similarly, I don’t go around bringing up authoritarianism. When someone else brings it up to defend it, I generally roll my eyes and move along.
Personally, I find this line of reasoning about definitions semantic in the least productive way. It’s just Loki’s Wager. So with all due respect, I don’t wish to debate you. I answered your question in good faith and I’m content to leave it at that.
I think you’re running into a problem, though. You may not call anyone a tankie unless they call themselves one, but my point is that the group commonly called tankies does exist. People argue over what the definition of a tankie actually is, but people aren’t arguing over what this group is, and that’s what we have to work with. Tankies are essentially people that support socialist states, and authoritarianism isn’t a particularly useful word in discussing shortcomings or successes of these states. It isn’t a meaningful signifier of anything different from capitalist states, because there’s little objectivity to its use.