Yes it does. In the UK, terrorism is defined more broadly, and the actions of this groups fall firmly within their legal definitions, hence why they were so swift with this designation.

https://justice.org.uk/counter-terrorism-human-rights/

Well from an anti-state perspective, supporting a country that commits radical acts such as monopoly of violence is by extension radical

This view is flawed because it mislabels the state’s monopoly on violence as inherently radical. In reality, this monopoly exists to prevent chaos by centralizing and regulating force. Calling it radical ignores the distinction between structured authority and unregulated violence. Supporting a state doesn’t mean endorsing oppression, it can mean recognizing the need for order over anarchy. The reason why humans have evolved to favor order over anarchy is because order provides stability, and this allows people to built up complex societies in relative safety.

I’d say tankies are also patriotic, just not for USA. Fatherland is a quite important concept in post-leninism forms of authoritarian communism. From my experience, it’s much more common to find anti-patriotism in libertarian communism / anarchism than in despotic communism.

Patriotism at it’s core is just a sense of pride, and that’s a universal emotion that everybody has. Everybody wants to feel like they belong to something greater. It gives us a feeling of nobility. All people share a feeling similar to patriotism, even if it’s labeled as something else… even anarchists.

Isn’t this the group that broke into a military airbase and damage several aircraft resulting in million of pounds worth of damages? I mean the security breach and the intent to maliciously damage the equipment is more than enough grounds to label the group as a terrorist group. If a right wing group or any other groups did this, everybody here would be calling them terrorists, and rightfully so. It makes sense for the UK to label this group as such, especially since they didn’t disavow the attack that happened.

The people who are trying to frame this as an attack on free speech are either full of shit and intentionally spreading misinformation or they’re ignorant enough to get their information from people who are full of shit and intentionally misinformation. This is something that clearly has nothing to do with free speech.

The question is flawed because it treats hierarchy, domination, and oppression as similar concepts, when they’re fundamentally different. Hierarchy isn’t inherently oppressive or bad. It is a feature that we evolved as a social species to coordinate action and reduce conflict. Hierarchies is precisely how we organize. The issue isn’t hierarchy itself, but whether it’s accountable and responsive. Domination and oppression arise when hierarchies become rigid and unchallengeable. So no, those outcomes aren’t inevitable, they’re the result of how power is structured and maintained, not of organization itself.

That was a typo, I meant to say nationalism. There’s definitely a lot inherently wrong with fascism

Tankies do not reject the totalitarian nation state, much less hierarchy

Yes they do, at least in theory, they just see tyranny and a state as a means to an end.

I’m a Bookchinite communalist.

I find it fascinating how every time I go online I always come across political hipsters who find some extremely niche and hyper specific ideology that has never been tried and nobody has heard of to sound cool.

What was it about my comment that led you think I’m a tankie?

Actually quite a few things. For starters, you don’t seem to understand that a nation state is just a community on a larger scale. Like what do you think a nation state is? If your community found itself without the protection a state, guess what? It’ll will develop a hierarchy to govern itself, it will enforce borders for protection, it will centralize for efficiency, and it will develop methods to punish those who don’t abide by the community rules. Actually that’s already the case for a lot of communities.

Also you seem to have this unfounded superiority complex over the “libs” despite not knowing what liberalism even is, let alone what liberal values are. Idk where your unfounded sense of confidence is coming from. If you think people create or support countries because of nostalgia then you’re living in some alternate universe.

Oh, and calling for the death of a country that’s home to 340 million people? Real classy, that totally doesn’t make you a scumbag.

Good for you I guess, my criticism of the quote still stands though

Lmao are you a high schooler? No wonder your views are so nonsensical

I mean you quoted him, you clearly endorse his view.

And I’m saying that you acknowledge a narrative rather than actual history. If you get most of your information about a topic by doomscrolling on Lemmy then it’s no wonder you think the way you do.

Here’s a short list of positive things if you really need it:

• The constitution
• Emancipation Proclamation
• Abolition of slavery through the 13th Amendment
• 19th Amendment granting women the right to vote
• Civil Rights Act
• Voting Rights Act
• Landed the first humans on the Moon
• Invented the airplane
• Created the internet
• Invented the cellphone and smartphone
• Developed the first nuclear reactor
• Introduced the assembly line
• Played a decisive role in winning both World Wars
• Launched the Marshall Plan to help rebuild Europe
• Founded the United Nations and a bunch of other global institutions
• Established NASA
• Developed vaccines for diseases like polio and COVID-19
• Created the National Parks system
• Produced globally influential music genres like jazz, hip hop, blues, country, funk, rock n roll, etc
• Maintained peaceful transfers of power for over two centuries
• The Americans with Disabilities Act
• Contributed to the defeat of fascism and communism in the 20th century
• Birthplace of global sports like basketball, volleyball, football, and so on
• Has world class universities that lead the globe in research and science like MIT, Harvard, and Stanford
• Has created great people like Teddy Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, MLK, Ben Franklin, George Washington, and so on

This country does have a dark side to it and there are many negatives as well. However, someone ignoring the positives of a country and only focusing on the negative is no different than someone who only focuses on the positives while ignoring the negatives.

And nationalism is bad, because? Nationalism when taken to the extreme can be bad because it’s extreme, but there’s nothing inherently wrong with nationalism.

Is there anything that you don’t think is a gateway drug to fascism?

That’s what a country is, it’s a community but on a bigger scale.

That’s just wrong, patriotism is subjective. The word means having a sense of pride, support, or devotion to your country. However, this concept can interpreted in wildly different ways by different people. One person could think that patriotism means standing by your country right or wrong, but another person could think that patriotism means criticizing your country when it’s done wrong. Both of these are valid forms of patriotism, it’s just that one is more extreme than the other.

This is stupid, every country has done many things to be proud of and many things to be ashamed of, and America is no exception. That’s just how history works. If you acknowledge only the negative and ignore the positive, then you’re not acknowledging history, but a narrative.

That’s not exactly a bad thing

Patriotism is a subjective concept. There are patriots who completely disagree with each other but still have a similar level of devotion for their country. People supporting their countries is not exactly radical. In fact, it’s very common everywhere but Lemmy because this place is filled with tankies.

The left wing is full of idiots who drown themselves in purity testing. I’ve seen so many morons who think that anything touched by any right wing person has to avoided like the plague otherwise you’re right wing too. It’s same mentality that 1st graders have about cooties. What makes this case particularly dumb is that Pepe, as well as Wojak, are meme templates made by the internet. That means they’re owned by no one and they stand for nothing. They exist to portray specific emotions that people relate to, that’s it.

Neither are bad, there’s nothing wrong with someone who has sense of devotion for their country or someone who believe in the idea of a nation state. It’s only bad when these concepts are taken to the extreme.

Ah yes, the ignorant wisdom of the enlightened tankie