People need to realize you can use alternatives

      • goat@burggit.moe
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Beehaw is not nice. Just look at their “rules

        If you’re worried about how our rules are explicitly open to interpretation, that’s on purpose and I hope the text above helps to clarify the vision that I have (and others of the community share) around how I’d like to see this community evolve and what we’d like to think we’re doing differently on this website. I’m not banning people for no reason or simply because they don’t agree with me. I want people to disagree with me. I want diverse opinions in here. But I also need this place to be nice and members of the community need to be willing to hold each other accountable in creating that kind of space. Of note, I’ve never banned a single person without openly discussing what happened with other individuals who participate in this community and asking for their input. I can’t promise this will always be the case, but I can promise that I’ll be open to having a discussion with any community member who feels that something unjust happened with another user or to themselves.

        Users from beehaw can’t even see this comment, nor yours if you reply to this one.

        The rules being "We reserve the right to ban you whenever we want.” are not rules, just check their modlog, they’re ban-happy.

    • Gray@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      All I know is that you should avoid lemmy.ml. In their /c/WorldNews community, an admin gave a four day ban to a user for posting an Axios article about the Chinese succession plan for the reason of “Orientalism”. Those guys are tankie shills. In my experience, lemmy.ca, sh.itjust.works, and lemmy.one seem solid. Obviously I personally went with lemmy.ca. But you should check out the admin profiles before you join any instance. That will tell you most of what you need to know. That and the modlogs (found at the bottom of the page) that will tell you what posts have been taken down and what people have been banned by mods on various communities.

        • Arcaneslime@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I recognize you, you’re an old head around these parts, you were there during my battle with that one CHEF_KOCH fuckface, I like you.

          That said, you’ve been here at least as long as I have, semantics regarding the word “shill” aside you know this place is (kinda was) a majority State Communist, or “Tankie,” echo chamber, and they pushed it relentlessly. It’s why you only ever saw me in c/linux, I don’t like political evangelism to the degree it used to be found here. C’mon lol.

            • Arcaneslime@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Because as I understand it Marxism is a stateless society, but most of the people here were supporting State Communism, so not Marxism.

                  • GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    This seems like a non-sequitur. Anyway, since audiobooks are still too much, let me just give a basic summary:

                    Marxists are not anarchists or communalists. Marx saw the failure of the Paris Commune and of the Utopian socialists and sought to create a theoretical framework that could be used in conjunction with practical political programs to resolve class struggle over time, which he predicted would ultimately produce a stateless society. This transitional society, to contrast with Marx’s name for liberal capitalism – the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie – is referred to as the dictatorship of the proletariat.

                    “State communism” is, uh, just made-up as far as I can tell. Marxists support the destruction of dictatorships of the bourgeoisie and their replacement with dictatorships of the proletariat. Generally they would like to see a stateless society one day, but they understand that a simple commune would get steamrolled the instant it became politically important enough, so they are principally concerned with making states democratic in a truer sense of the word than liberal democracy – which is de facto controlled by the rich – in order to end “capitalist encirclement” and make things like communes more viable.

          • krolden@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I think that’s a bit reductionist as even ‘tankies’ have varying opinions on many issues. I used to hate dealing with them, and disagree with their apparent love for the old soviet bloc more times than not.

            However, I have to say, pretty much EVERYTHING they say about the US government and their allies is 100% factual. That also applies to a lot of the stuff they say about current communist countries, most of what you’re fed about them from western media is meant to incite rage and hate towards asian countries in order to keep your attention away from the atrocities committed by your own government.

        • Gray@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          China and Russia. Thus censoring legitimate western media articles about China. There’s also a lot of anti-NATO bullshit. Here’s the Axios article they banned a user for posting.

          • GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            legitimate western media articles

            anti-NATO bullshit

            Out of idle curiosity, do you self-identify as a leftist?

            • Gray@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I generally align with the left most of the time, but I hate making one label the basis for your entire political opinion. I am very against censorship. My greatest pet issues have to do with censorship and democratic principles. In terms of American politics, I will never vote Republican. If I feel a Democrat has let me down in a big way, I would consider voting third party, but 99% of the time I would vote Democratic. Centrist Democrats piss me off more than leftist ones. My foreign policy stances are probably the least in line with the further left. I am generally pro-NATO with the understanding that NATO isn’t perfect. I just worry way more about a world with China/Russia at the helm given their propensity for censoring opinions that oppose their majority parties.

              • GarbageShootAlt2@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                I am generally pro-NATO with the understanding that NATO isn’t perfect.

                I’m terminally-online enough that I am used to the paths of most arguments that have appeared on this website about politics, but – and I say this to be transparent – this one baffles me and I don’t know how to respond to it. I’ve seen people say it but, well, it gets hard to explain within rule 1.

                Maybe if we agree that “NATO is an extension of US foreign policy” we can sidestep the issue for now.

                I just worry way more about a world with China/Russia at the helm given their propensity for censoring opinions that oppose their majority parties.

                This one I am much more used to. Remembering that NATO is a military organization and not, you know, “who controls the internet,” I’d like to just present you with a simple pair of questions:

                1. How many of the past thirty years has the US been at war?

                2. How many of the past thirty years has China been at war?

                Beyond that, for all the fearmongering people do, China is remarkably less interested in unilaterally dictating relations than you might think, so explaining things in terms of “which country is the master of the unipolar world order” is not justified. Unipolarity has only been the state of things for a little over 30 years (and only obvious for a little over 40) and was unheard of before that. There is no reason to suppose that the future can only be unipolar, especially if the country that ushered in unipolarity and viciously guards it with world-historic levels of violence (the US) is no longer the strongest force.

                China has shown every indication of seeking bilateral development and cooperation. An example in severe microcosm is the US banning China from the International Space Station and China responding by making its own space station which the US isn’t banned from, nor most other countries (though I think it is still a finite list and not totally open, owing in part to being a new program). Stories like “debt traps” from China are grotesque projection, as China doesn’t do things like forced restructuring or asset seizure, unlike the IMF.

                I truly think this sort of “US is the least of the available evils” ideology has a hard time existing except in a subcultural bubble where it meets no challenge at all, because it is an astoundingly flimsy position.

                • Gray@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I don’t oppose China’s right to exist as a power. I do disagree with the US doing things like banning China from the ISS. I also am not blind to the IMF scheme and what it has done to the non-western world and I oppose that. I am quite opposed to the way that Israel has been handled and there clearly needs to be some kind of compromise with Palestine. I’m not even going to try to touch that issue in terms of the way right way for it to be handled, but clearly the solution isn’t what they currently have. I am pro-NATO in how they’ve handled the war in Ukraine. I am pro-NATO in the sense that it prevents attacks on its member nations, which Ukraine in my eyes has been very clear evidence of the need for.

                  Like I said before, I think checking all the boxes in one political ideology more often than not leads to some shitty, lazy stances, so maybe labeling myself as pro-NATO was a mistake. It’s fair to say that the world doesn’t need one superpower. In terms of China, more than anything I just wish they allowed for more debate and opposition within their political structure. Again, democracy and censorship are my pet issues. I worry for any world where the mechanisms that allow us to express ourselves and correct our flaws are stifled. The US hasn’t been some gold standard for the right way to do it, but I don’t see anyone better stepping up to the plate yet.

                  In terms of my original comment that triggered this conversation, at the end of the day I think it is wrong to ban anyone for posting opinions that a moderator disagrees with. That’s political censorship and it’s shitty. If lemmy.ml had clear rules about their political stances and what’s allowed, then that would be different. But as it is, I think they’re misrepresenting what their community is if they’re going to censor such content. “Orientalism” in their context implies that any conversations about another country not from within that country should be taken down. Should non-US articles about the US also be removed? Is anyone not from China allowed to talk about China?

                  As for my original comment about “anti-NATO bullshit”, I confess that was a personal opinion that probably didn’t belong next to my more objective opposition to politcal censorship. I personally wouldn’t join lemmy.ml for their political stances. I objectively would recommend people not join that instance because of their political censorship.

    • goat@burggit.moe
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Avoid any instance that bans/blocks other instances. As for communities, just find whatever you like.