No, it’s not. Tankie in NO WAY means “people who support peace”.
You explained why, true, but your explanation was FALSE. Because words are defined by common use. And common use of the word “tankie” is “authoritarian communist”, not “people who support peace”.
You saying I’ve failed proves that I’m right, because you also say “tankie means people who support peace”. Your claims are absurdly wrong to a comical degree, you’re some kind of bizarro tankie that hates itself.
I have made ZERO blind assertions and provided a definition from CAMBRIDGE.
Your points aren’t real, if only they were as solid as a brick wall. You have nothing to back you up, I have decades of word usage and published definitions used everywhere English is used.
Again, blandly asserting “I’m right and you’re wrong.” I don’t know if you’re just stubborn, or if you lack the capacity to engage beyond that. Either way, you obviously have nothing to contribute.
It’s “I am right as reflected by the entire history of the word until its present day, as recorded by Cambridge, Oxford, Webster’s, dictionary.com, and every other English dictionary… and you are wrong”.
You DO contribute something… a chuckle.
Nothing in any definition about peace, sorry friend.
It doesn’t mean “peaceful negotiator” etc. in any recorded English literature since the inception of the word… somehow what you call “use” has avoided every English publication ever printed for sixty years.
Oh, I get it! By ‘use’ you mean "no one has ever said this ever’, just like by “tankie” you mean “peaceful negotiator”!
Now I’m not sure what you mean by arguments and points… obviously by argument you mean agreement, and by point you mean vague nonsensical claim not reflected anywhere in English ever.
No, it’s not. Tankie in NO WAY means “people who support peace”.
You explained why, true, but your explanation was FALSE. Because words are defined by common use. And common use of the word “tankie” is “authoritarian communist”, not “people who support peace”.
You saying I’ve failed proves that I’m right, because you also say “tankie means people who support peace”. Your claims are absurdly wrong to a comical degree, you’re some kind of bizarro tankie that hates itself.
How many times are you going to blandly assert that your definition is correct while ignoring all my points? Like talking to a brick wall.
I have made ZERO blind assertions and provided a definition from CAMBRIDGE.
Your points aren’t real, if only they were as solid as a brick wall. You have nothing to back you up, I have decades of word usage and published definitions used everywhere English is used.
That’s because you’re wrong, and that’s okay!
Again, blandly asserting “I’m right and you’re wrong.” I don’t know if you’re just stubborn, or if you lack the capacity to engage beyond that. Either way, you obviously have nothing to contribute.
It’s far beyond “I’m right and you’re wrong.”
It’s “I am right as reflected by the entire history of the word until its present day, as recorded by Cambridge, Oxford, Webster’s, dictionary.com, and every other English dictionary… and you are wrong”.
You DO contribute something… a chuckle.
Nothing in any definition about peace, sorry friend.
Yes, only in practice and common use.
It doesn’t mean “peaceful negotiator” etc. in any recorded English literature since the inception of the word… somehow what you call “use” has avoided every English publication ever printed for sixty years.
Snort
And if you engaged with my actual arguments and points instead of blandly asserting “I’m right and you’re wrong,” you’d understand why.
Oh, I get it! By ‘use’ you mean "no one has ever said this ever’, just like by “tankie” you mean “peaceful negotiator”!
Now I’m not sure what you mean by arguments and points… obviously by argument you mean agreement, and by point you mean vague nonsensical claim not reflected anywhere in English ever.
Right?
By right, I mean you’re wrong.