• barsoap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    It’s the tankie “It’s not a genocide, no I’m not denying that people are getting murdered I’m saying that they had it coming for reasons other than being of a particular group” kind of genocide denial-support.

    About the only thing that makes tankies not technically fascist is that they come up with elaborate rationalisations of why everything they do serves the common good. They manage to rationalise any and all human rights abuses and atrocities as “necessary evil”.

    Once upon a time a German lyricist/composer wrote a song satirising that kind of attitude. The GDR’s ruling party adopted is as their hymn, unironically. Do watch it it’s glorious in its insanity.

    • cnnrduncan@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      1 year ago

      Most far-right fascists also make up excuses for the genocides they support - the Nazis said that Jewish people were responsible for the collapse of the Weimar economy (and a lot of other bullshit) for example.

      • barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah but fascists don’t believe it, or even put much effort in those arguments. It’s merely a signal to their supporters saying “Yep we hate Jews”.

        And I do grant tankies the point that they don’t inherently hate Uyghurs – what they hate is there being cultural aspects not under their control as that means a current of mass psychology outside of party control. The most they will countenance is “Socialism with Uyghur characteristics” next to “Socialism with Chinese characteristics”, under the condition that it’s about weave patterns of traditional hats or something, not loyalty to the party’s prerogative of interpretation: If Bejing thinks a particular weave pattern is counter-revolutionary then it is, Uyghurs don’t get a say.

        • iie@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          what they hate is there being cultural aspects not under their control

          china claims they were interning uighurs to prevent extremist terrorism and separatism, not control culture. xinjiang shares a border with afghanistan. the claim is that uighurs were going off to fight in syria and other regions, then coming back to start shit at home. china claims the mass detainment of uighurs was to provide language and vocational training to counter the sway of jihadists returning from the middle east.

          • barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            One would expect people to volunteer for both of those things if they’re actually what China claims them to be.

            In reality the parents are sent to forced labour camps while the kids are sent to boarding schools to be de-Uighurised.

    • ThisIsMyNewAccount@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      1 year ago

      By what definition of fascism are tankies the same?

      I’ve seen the term tankie more here in my last week in the fediverse than at any other time in my life so forgive me if I don’t fully understand. From what I’ve gathered, it’s extreme auth-left. Though being authoritarian does not automatically mean fascist.

      • barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        1 year ago

        They’re not the same but the more you ignore motive and rationale the more similar they look. As such, they’re the same by the “definition” of shallow analysis, or over-subscribing to “the purpose of a system is what it does” which I tend to be guilty of.

        • argv_minus_one@beehaw.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          All you’re guilty of is cutting through BS. If a system does something bad, and whoever controls it isn’t making any attempt to fix that, then it’s safe to assume that the bad thing is intentional.