this post was submitted on 05 Jun 2025

73 points (88.4% liked)

MeanwhileOnGrad

1820 readers

21 users here now

"Oh, this is calamity! Calamity! Oh no, he's on the floor!"

Welcome to MoG!

Meanwhile On Grad

Documenting hate speech, conspiracy theories, apologia/revisionism, and general tankie behaviour across the fediverse. Memes are welcome!

What is a Tankie?

Alternatively, a detailed blog post about Tankies.

(caution of biased source)

Basic Rules:

Sh.itjust.works Instance rules apply! If you are from other instances, please be mindful of the rules. — Basically, don't be a dick.

Hate-Speech — You should be familiar with this one already; practically all instances have the same rules on hate speech.

Apologia — (Using the Modern terminology for Apologia) No Defending, Denying, Justifying, Bolstering, or Differentiating authoritarian acts or endeavours, whether be a Pro-CCP viewpoint, Stalinism, Islamic Terrorism or any variation of Tankie Ideology.

Revisionism — No downplaying or denying atrocities past and present. Calling Tankies shills, foreign/federal agents, or bots also falls under this rule. Extremists exist. They are real. Do not call them shills or fake users as it handwaves their extremism.

Tankies can explain their views but may be criticised or attacked for them. Any slight infraction on the rules above will immediately earn a warning and possibly a ban.

Off-topic Discussion — Do not discuss unrelated topics to the point of derailing the thread. Stay focused on the direct content of the post as opposed to arguing.

You'll be warned if you're violating the instance and community rules. Continuing poor behaviour after being warned will result in a ban or removal of your comments. Bans typically only last 24 hours, but each subsequent infraction will double the amount. Depending on the content, the ban time may be increased. You may request an unban at any time.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

goat@sh.itjust.works

PugJesus@lemmy.world

Only the best sources on .ml! Lol (lemmy.world)

submitted 4 days ago by cm0002@lemmy.world to c/meanwhileongrad@sh.itjust.works

24 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Whose got the stethoscope theory image?

top 24 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Jiggle_Physics@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 days ago

I mean presstv.ir is literally the iranian government's english and french language channel

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 22 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Whose got the stethoscope theory image?

[–] jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

what's the opposite side of tankes? far right pro 2nd and first amendment?

[–] Snowpix@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No. Tankies and conservatives are two sides of the same coin. The opposite side of tankies would be actual non-authoritarian leftists.

[–] jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

so you're saying the opposite side of tankies is conservatives?

[–] Snowpix@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

No. Tankies aren't leftists. They're authoritarians, and have more in common with conservatives than leftists do. They're the same side.

[–] jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works -1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

perhaps you are misunderstanding, I am asking what would the offshoot from the far right pipeline that ends near far left look like.

and coins only ever have two sides.

[–] Skiluros@sh.itjust.works 34 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Nuclear technology has revolutionized Iranian agriculture?

This is comically dumb.

[–] Slovene 26 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

What, you've never heard of nuclear powered tractors? It's called technology, honey, look it up. NEXT!

[–] harrys_balzac@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 4 days ago

The fusion powered combine is amazing! It even comes with a protective suit that is functional and stylish.

[–] ryedaft@sh.itjust.works 9 points 4 days ago

Pretty sure there are some French combine harvesters with some nuclear in there. It's just very low radiation for some sensors but I'm sure it wouldn't roll in my country.

[–] el_bhm@lemm.ee 2 points 3 days ago

I have a bridge. If one can believe, I can sell it.

[–] gigachad@sh.itjust.works 20 points 4 days ago (1 children)

BuT MeDiA BiAs cHeCk iS ShIt aNd cAnT Be tRuStEd

[–] harrys_balzac@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 4 days ago

Well, getting this wrong would be like throwing a tennis ball and not hitting the side of the barn. From inside the barn.

[+] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de -8 points 4 days ago (2 children)

The second is somewhat accurate. She has been cheering on Israel quite a bit.

[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 24 points 4 days ago (1 children)

If it's true and accurate, then one would have no issue finding, and posting, a better source quickly

[+] Saleh@feddit.org -14 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (3 children)

Manufacturing consent exists (there is a great book detailing how it works) and "better" aka western mainstream media sources systematically skew, omit and promote information, sometimes even spread outright disinformation in line with the political ideology of their owners, their corporate interests or their national ideologies too.

The idea that you would always find a "better source" creates a circular logic, where everything that mainstream media outlets report on and how they report on it is true and relevant and everything else is either false or irrelevant.

This for instance creates "worthy and unworthy victims" as detailed in the book Manufacturing Consent by the example that a polish priest murdered in the 80s was a "worthy victim" that was in the American news cycle for months, while American nuns that were raped and murdered in El Salvador by an US compliant fascist Regime received minimal attention and their murderers received minimal consequences.

By declaring which victims are "worthy and unworthy" on the opposite site it creates which perpetrators are acceptable and which are evil. Thereby Baerbock is a "good perpetrator". Subsequently mainstream media omits here spreading of disinformation for Israel, Germany's complicity in Israeli crimes during her period as foreign minister and how she made claims about Civillians being legitimate targets that have been strongly renounced by experts on international law.

The logic of your remark basically breaks down to "our media is good, their media is bad". The same notion is given by every regime in the world.

[–] Skiluros@sh.itjust.works 9 points 3 days ago

This is some high level word salad.

You most definitely can find a better source and use general critical thinking skills. There is no circular logic.

Also ironic to see you talk about "worthy and unworthy victims" when Chomski engages in this regularly (just one example is his open and committed support for russian genocidal imperialism).

People dealing with russian genocidal imperialism are "unworthy victims" because they undermine Chomsky's sophomoric attitude to towards the bad things that the US has done.

[–] antonim@lemmy.dbzer0.com 7 points 3 days ago (1 children)

western mainstream media sources systematically skew, omit and promote information, sometimes even spread outright disinformation in line with the political ideology of their owners, their corporate interests or their national ideologies too

As opposed to eastern(?) mainstream media, western non-mainstream media, and eastern(?) non-mainstream media. Propagandistic goals of the media exist always and everywhere, I don't see why it's necessary to single out western mainstream media in this discussion. (I'd note that I agree that having some site just throw an unsubstantiated "fake news" label onto news sites is worthless as criticism.)

[–] Saleh@feddit.org 3 points 3 days ago

The point is that the notion of western media being better is wrong. All media is subject to propaganda in varying extend and you must be critical of anything you read or hear.

[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 8 points 4 days ago (1 children)

A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source.

[–] RidderSport@feddit.org 20 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Even if that were true, the headline is already framing and extremely biased - that is not good journalism

[–] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works -3 points 4 days ago

But is bog standard from pretty much everyone nowadays.