Tankie’s original use was for British communists who supported Soviet military expansion. In the modern sense, it is used to describe communists who are authoritarian-apologists. For example, a communist who romanticizes the Soviet Union or makes excuses for the Uyghur genocide is a tankie. I’ve also seen it stretched to include militant anti-capitalists, or more commonly, “militant,” anti-capitalists who call for violent resistance to capitalism from the safety of a keyboard.
Democratic-Socialists are not tankies. Socialists are not tankies. I don’t even think most communists qualify as tankies. Criticizing Democrats does not make you a tankie. Condemning Israel’s human rights violations does not make you a tankie. Voting third party doesn’t make you a tankie. I see this term used here every day, but never correctly.
But there is something that separates a communist from a tankie. It isn’t the willingness to use violence, but their willingness to do so against their beliefs if it benefits “the communist side” even though it is an oppressive act.
Supporting violent resistance in Gaza doesn’t make someone a tankie, but supporting Russia’s invasion of Ukraine does.