I do generally agree with this in principle. The governmental structure of Iran, for example, makes a lot of sense if your explicit goal is to be as coup-proof as possible. This is very much a double-edged sword: a country built on legitimate paranoia often sees any protest as foreign interference, regardless of the reality.

Again, at the expense of being strawmanned, this is enough to invoke "anti-tankie" rules. Most of the anti-tankie action in blahaj.zone, .world, and all the other liberals is acknowledging this. And taking into context that articles and opinions of "look at how evil and bad and irredeemable country and its people is" is apologizing for authoritarianism. If you are not cheering for the overthrow of the Iranian government simply because the US would do everything to make something worse result from it, you are a "tankie" and what blahaj and .world mean by the word.

Maybe I’m just taking crazy pills here, but most of the opinions on the war over seen here can be boiled down to “Evil Ukrainian Nazis bad, Russia good”.

I may be a little optimistic in how few people took seriously the Russian government's official story of the invasion being entirely because of the overt Nazism of the Ukrainian armed forces and the explicit anti-Russian ethnosupremacy of the Ukranian government in their civil war that started in 2014, but it is still a minority. But I will say that I am worried that I am taking crazy pills. A large part of the accusations of "tankie" is not agreeing with "Russia evil orcs, Ukrainians are perfect elven defenders of Western Civilization". I still stand by my previous statements of any attempt of explaining the Russian paranoia of a hostile military alliance moving closer to its borders (NATO was supposedly only supposed to defend against the Warsaw Pact, though NATO pre-dated it) and the fact that the US was attempting Color Revolutions on its border (I know that for invoking color revolutions I need to justify against anti-CIA bias. But color revolutions do take advantage and empower actual discontent of the local population, the CIA can't summon governmental changes with a wave of a wand. It is just what the US government and media supports and legitimizes.) But ever acknowledging that Russia would be upset by the CIA helping to install a hostile government on its border, with plans to join a hostile military alliance, is tankieism.

It can’t be “some sectors” and a “full embrace”

Just like the Republican party can fully embrace MAGA but only some sectors of the US are Trump acolytes. Euromaidan produced very organized and energized neo-nazi groups like Azov Battalion, C-14, Aidar, etc. And even though they didn't have a majority in the elected government, the fact that they had a very large amount of angry, motivated, and armed men with military supplies mean that the government knew they could not cross or displease them. They have taken priority and given special consideration due to the war of the last 12 years. An ethno-nationalist military formation will be more motivated and more willing to fight hard than a random conscript. This has become significantly more apparent since 2022 where the actual conscripts that are grabbed off the streets are sent to their death as cannon fodder, so that Azov or Aidar can take advantage of the softened line and expended munitions to try to attack a possible weak point. The war has legitimized these neo-nazi groups and empowered them as they have greater recruitment since you are less likely to have your life thrown away as cannon fodder if you enlist with them rather than wait to be conscripted and thrown against Russian drones. And they are legitimized by being the forces capturing territory and fighting off Russian advances as the normal rank and file are sacrificed for it.