Skip Navigation

You're viewing part of a thread.

Show Context
249 comments

  • That would be .world the entire last election year telling people to shut up about Palestine and vote blue

    I'll only speak for myself: I was extremely vocal about Palestine and the horror of the genocide there, while also recommending that people vote "blue" because Trump would make that genocide somehow even much worse while also adding many additional horrors to the world.

    Absolutely nothing was solved simply by refusing to vote "blue." The problems were made much worse. That is exactly why I was recommending to vote "blue," to avoid that happening. This weird strawman where people didn't care about Palestine, and that's why they wanted Kamala Harris to win, is totally fucking weird.

    Also, the people pointing out that the .ml general consensus view is completely fine with genocide when it's happening in Ukraine or Xinjiang absolutely have a point. You're not anti-imperialist, if you are generally in agreement with the .ml hivemind (I don't know if you are or not, just going by other interactions with people there).

    • The people pointing out 'the .ml general consensus' by running a smear campaign are not exactly operating in good faith or opposed to imperialism, they just have a preferred team (the US + co).

      From direct experience it's not a monolith, earlier today I made a post on hex shitting on Putin with 50+ upvotes, I didn't get banned for wrongthink yet and it's not the first time.

      Just don't be weirdly xenophobic/misogynistic is more the vibe I've picked up on. I never understand when people go in looking for a fight or stir shit somewhere then act surprised when the response is to shut it down or mock them. I've had it happen to me plenty just for voicing my opinions earnestly in liberal spaces.

      You may think that it speaks negatively of me if I'm more comfortable in the 'tankie-run' spaces as opposed to the liberal ones, but a large part of it is because they have a much lower tolerance for bigotry/misogyny/transphobia in general than the rest of lemmy and I've seen them actually attempting to address it when it's brought up. (on hexbear at least, .ml is more of a boys club) I've even talked shit about one of the admins here for failing to address his transphobic comment history- as it stands if nutomic does ever post in /c/transgender it's going to be a race between me and marcie to ban him from it.

      So again, not a monolith.

      re: voting, The democrats were acting unbelievably condescending from the start of the genocide, that the issue was going to go away in 6 months because people would forget. It may not seem like it to you, but from my position (and many others) it absolutely looks like they didn't care and were telling people to shut up and get in line.

      • The people pointing out ‘the .ml general consensus’ by running a smear campaign are not exactly operating in good faith or opposed to imperialism, they just have a preferred team (the US + co).

        Here's the kind of thing I was talking about:

        https://ponder.cat/post/2492263

        100% of Hexbear users trying to justify Russia's invasion, and saying that the US should cut off aid to motivate Ukraine to sue for peace (as if they're somehow not "in favor" of peace, being the ones that got invaded.)

        You might or might not agree with my take on the opinions presented there from the Hexbear side. But that unanimity of viciously imperialistic jingo in favor of Russia, combined with total disinterest in engaging about talking it through on the merits and demonstrating that their arguments are based in reality when someone disagrees with them, is what I was talking about.

        • I started here so as to get an understanding, going to remark on a few things I saw:

          I don't think this is them trolling you, (...) ::: spoiler spoiler it reads like an earnest response and your reply looks like an overreaction. It just looks like you might have replied to the wrong person or misinterpreted the meaning of the comment? The comment reads to me as speculating on the reason for Trump flip-flopping, not making a value judgement besides calling the trade war with china 'dumbfuck'

          :::

          I'm actually primarily a .ml user, (...) ::: spoiler spoiler I started using .ml because I like to get a variety of views and everyones propaganda for a given situation so that I can make my own critical assessment.

          I do hang out in their comms and even help moderate one but I've pretty much only ever lurked there to get an idea for the vibes and it feels weird to be lumped in together as me representing them. Maybe if you frame it as they have an instance where they allow comments (like mine) made by reckless individuals (like me) to be made without moderation it would be more accurate.

          :::

          Really not a fan of SA analogies being used frivolously tbh, but you do you- (...) ::: spoiler spoiler

          The "answering questions" sticks out, because that's what they're referring to as JAQing off elsewhere- it's not a hexbear specific term, nor is sealioning, that's just internet slang. I didn't see this thread posted anywhere else on hexbear to drive engagement, they just have relatively high traffic and users will be showing up in federated threads if they're not browsing local.

          I could just ignore it but I feel like that’s not the way. I don’t really feel like ceding the narrative space to them even if 99% of the people reading understand that they’re full of shit about it. I think most people have just moved on from wanting to engage with it.

          I feel like this kind of tips your hand a bit for the engagement. I get the impulse to assume bad faith, I do it often and it's something I'm working on tbh. Anyway, might be a moot point since you're banned, I'll get to this in the conclusion, but I think you were being overly confrontational, also going in treating this as a narrative space to be fought over going is probably why you're going to get a response reflecting that.

          :::

          Regarding viciously imperialistic jingo in favor of Russia: shelling donbass ::: spoiler spoiler

          It is verifiable fact that the cities in the separatist region were getting routinely shelled basically since 2014, I for one recall constantly hearing about that in that time period unless your conclusion is that they deserved it or that it was just crisis actors or some influence campaign something. Either way it's not jingoism to express that knowledge.

          :::

          Regarding viciously imperialistic jingo in favor of Russia: opposition to NATO

          Regarding viciously imperialistic jingo in favor of Russia: Self determination

          conclusion:

          I might as well address the ban here too:

          I hope you enjoy my lengthy responses, I tried to summarize it from my reading and for what it's worth I tried to approach it as impartially as I could given the circumstances.

          • I hope you enjoy my lengthy responses, I tried to summarize it from my reading and for what it’s worth I tried to approach it as impartially as I could given the circumstances.

            Yeah, I'm completely fine with a serious discussion about it, because you seem like you're capable of a serious discussion. So, right from the jump, the first comment they made:

            That immediately to me is super offensive. Probably more so than pig shit pictures, definitely more so than me being condescending to them. Why? Because it is deliberate lies in service of killing. I still dealt with it factually, and I indicated I'd be open to a factual exchange. You want me to be nice about it also? Why would I do that? That doesn't seem like it's necessary.

            I have no idea if that person actually thinks that Putin will honor a cease-fire, whether randomly unilaterally announced or not. It is clear to me that he will not. Actually, you seemed to acknowledge that they know he won't (saying that all of these cease-fires tend to fall apart and not be honored). There are plenty of cease-fires that get honored, definitely plenty that aren't broken on a huge scale right away on purpose.

            Bottom line: I've known people from Ukraine. I've talked with them about their country getting torn apart, people they know getting killed, with an endless stream of lies coming from the other side about the reasons why and the things they can do to stop it from happening. I just don't have patience for it. My whole SA analogy is in absolutely no way frivolous. I think it's an absolutely spot-on way of expressing the horror of Russia claiming they're only blowing up apartment buildings and hospitals because someone might be trying to resist them or give a security guarantee, and they didn't like that, so they have every right to keep killing until they feel like stopping. And, someone on Lemmy saying the answer to that all is to stop arming Ukraine so they can't fight back anymore. I think it's disgusting, and I don't think I'm required to be nice when explaining why.

            I don't think anyone on Hexbear has any right to request that someone not be "overly antagonistic" when they speak to them. For obvious reasons. The whole framing reeks of privilege and dishonesty, of creating rules for other people without any pretense that you're planning to follow them yourself.

            I do think that some of the Hexbear people are just confused and going along with the herd in terms of their beliefs and behavior. The whole propaganda framing is pretty powerful. Calm conversation is "sealioning" and it's bad. Dissenting voices are conflated with bigotry, even if they have nothing to do with it, and so banning dissent is "protecting the space" from bigotry and just standing up for the oppressed which no other instance will do. Of course. There are all these words that get redefined as other different words, and all sorts of facts that aren't true that are repeated so aggressively and often that they start to get accepted, and so these things they believe and do start to make sense within the off-kilter light they're seen in.

            Nakoiochi’s response is not jingoistic here either

            Yes it is.

            There are two narratives about shelling in Donbas:

            1. That Ukraine's Nazi government was randomly shelling civilians in Donbas and Russia tried their best through good means to put a stop to it, and eventually, they had no choice but to invade.
            2. That Moscow funded separatists to start a mini-civil-war in Donbas and then blamed the resulting death on an imaginary Nazi government in Kyiv.

            I know that several times I've asked people who told me the first narrative to back it up, and they couldn't. They would send me sources that said one thing claiming it said something else, send me random Youtube videos that didn't actually prove anything, that kind of thing. I don't actually know whether it is the second narrative that's true, or whether it's sort of a "truth is somewhere in the middle" type of thing. It's hard to say, at least for me with as much as I've looked into it. But I definitely have seen several people who said it was the first thing and found out afterwards that they were talking purely out of their ass.

            Uncritically saying that Moscow's narrative is definitely true is jingoistic. And actually, dealing with people who disagree by simply shouting them down in a pack is more or less a key component of jingoism to me. The fact that Moscow says the first narrative is what happened means absolutely nothing to me, since they generally lie about all kinds of things constantly. I touched on that in that big conversation (with no substantive response, go figure). I've never heard anyone outside of that bubble say that's what happened. And, like I said, even if it did happen exactly the way Moscow claims it did, that wouldn't excuse three years of mass killing in Ukraine. They've killed more Russian-speakers now, probably a hundred times over, by sending them into the meat grinder or just semi-accidentally bombing their homes in the course of the war, than anyone ever claimed had been killed in Donbas.

            If someone is ethnically Russian in eastern Ukraine, and they're unhappy with the Kyiv government, there are means to deal with that other than starting a civil war.

            I want to link here this - Ukraine Found Complicit in 2014 Massacre By European Court of Human Rights I’ve just seen too many swastikas over the last 3 years to say this is anything but an unfair assessment.

            This is a great example of what I was talking about. It's just lies. The underlying fact is true, the court did order Ukraine to pay some people because of what happened in the burning of the trade union building, but it's being summarized in a wildly misleading way. On purpose. To tell lies to justify slaughter.

            I would actually really recommend that you read the actual judgement that they're summarizing here in this way. You tell me whether this page you linked me to is summarizing what the court actually found in an accurate way.

            Like I say: I'm fine having a factual discussion about it, but I don't see why I would be obligated in any way to be nice to someone who doesn't want that and is also willing to be 10 times more offensive than I am when they're on the other side of the disagreement. To me that's not offensive, it's just fairness.

            • I don’t think anyone on Hexbear has any right to request that someone not be “overly antagonistic” when they speak to them. For obvious reasons. The whole framing reeks of privilege and dishonesty, of creating rules for other people without any pretense that you’re planning to follow them yourself.

              My suggestion was more from the direction of if you hope to be getting something from the conversation other than generating adrenaline, (I know I'm not always the best example of this) maybe you shouldn't be so antagonistic. The path you took resulting in a few back and forths, then you obliquely accused someone of being Russian and got banned. I don't think that trying to tie that in to a broader echo chamber narrative tracks from that either. The internet is full of places where people seek out others with similar politics, it seems like a simpler explanation for their ideological uniformity.

              From what I could tell it was only two top level comments in 4 hours from hexbear, Sasuke's comment was entirely innocuous when it comes to the Ukraine war and you replied to it by soapboxing about hexbear broadly. I don't think that type of reaction really serves your own goals, it just makes you look like you're overreacting out of nowhere.

              I have no idea if that person actually thinks that Putin will honor a cease-fire, whether randomly unilaterally announced or not. It is clear to me that he will not. Actually, you seemed to acknowledge that they know he won’t (saying that all of these cease-fires tend to fall apart and not be honored). There are plenty of cease-fires that get honored, definitely plenty that aren’t broken on a huge scale right away on purpose.

              I don't think any of us can really know what's in Putins head, there's tons of other factors besides that which also will contribute to if a ceasefire holds. ie, how much control do both armies have over the individuals, are there miscommunications, do people continue to restrain themselves in spite of the violations, etc, them I don't think it's all down to one person if the ceasefire succeeds or fails.

              And, someone on Lemmy saying the answer to that all is to stop arming Ukraine so they can’t fight back anymore. I think it’s disgusting, and I don’t think I’m required to be nice when explaining why.

              I've also known many people from Ukraine over the years, you will forgive me if I don't give too many personal details, I don't think me supplying my own anecdotes would help anyways. You seem to feel very strongly about your position and don't seem very curious about why people might disagree.

              There are two narratives about shelling in Donbas:

              That Ukraine’s Nazi government was randomly shelling civilians in Donbas and Russia tried their best through good means to put a stop to it, and eventually, they had no choice but to invade.

              That Moscow funded separatists to start a mini-civil-war in Donbas and then blamed the resulting death on an imaginary Nazi government in Kyiv.

              I'm inclined to say somewhere in between, take for example the Donbass self defense forces, some of those were definitely Russian military and some of those were absolutely locals. Either way, they could not have survived without Russian military aid. However to say people are 'moscow funded' the equivalent is also true- the Ukraine government is US funded. Ukraines media is US funded.

              Uncritically saying that Moscow’s narrative is definitely true is jingoistic. And actually, dealing with people who disagree by simply shouting them down in a pack is more or less a key component of jingoism to me.

              I would say that if someone who's Russian was behaving in support of Russia the way I've seen a lot of pro-Ukraine lemmy users behave I would probably be more inclined to call it as jingoistic. Not to be edgy or anything, but I've been in my share of Russian telegram groups, I've been to family gatherings, I have run into my share of Russian jingoism. As near as I can tell the person you were responding to (Nakoiochi) is a US anarchist. They weren't calling them Khokols or gloating, they just mocked Trumps promises to fix this in 24hr because there is a standing offer that he could accept- unless he just has no control over the situation. (likely)

              Either way a core component of jingoism is nationalism, and it feels weird to be accusing people of being nationalist for a different country, when they're an anarchist, just because you don't like their understanding of world events. I don't think people who are saying something that happens to be in agreement with the position of a particular nation are then necessarily nationalist as a result, especially if they're not even from there and in fact live in the geopolitical enemy.

              If someone is ethnically Russian in eastern Ukraine, and they’re unhappy with the Kyiv government, there are means to deal with that other than starting a civil war.

              In my previous response I asked twice about your position on self-determination, that wasn't me being flippant, but more trying to get at a core contradiction in the way separatist regions looking for self-determination have been treated. When it was Kosovo it was acceptable to allow for separatists to break away, do you think that it would have made the situation better for Russia to start dumping weapons on Serbia in that situation to help them counter the 'invasion' from Albania? It's a hypothetical and not really logistically feasible, but my point is more that this situation went from bad to worse because fuel has only been continually added to this fire rather than de-escalation.

              Re: Odessa Trade union

              The article I linked did include large sections from the reporting along with the broader context. There's details which are actively disputed; the point is not the grisly details which are always ripe for propaganda embellishment, but rather the points as laid out in the report. The picture painted is of a government which actively made the situation worse, and enabled those very Russian propaganda campaigns by their own complicity in the massacre and the subsequent investigation.

              Quoting the report: (directly)

              The issue is it's hard to dismiss calling the Ukrainian government 'Nazi' when there's been this level of collaboration between right wing (in some cases openly nazi) gangs doing political terrorism to people. Those gangs are now a part of the military, as long as their military tolerates people running around with a black sun or whatever nazi paraphernalia it's just going to get photographed and circulated on Russian social media, feeding into that same propaganda campaign you yourself expressed an interest in combating.

      • It may not seem like it to you, but from my position (and many others) it absolutely looks like

        Yeah, that's the problem. You're operating off "many others" instead of just talking to me specifically about what I specifically did and had issue with and my point of view on it. If you actually had any familiarity with what people were saying on lemmy.world and why, without getting filtered through this bizarro-world lens of how .ml views it, you wouldn't be saying this stuff.

        A lot of what you're saying (not a monolith and so on) is completely valid. I'm pretty sure I very explicitly acknowledged that when I said that I'm not aware of your specific viewpoint on it, just speaking in general about what I've observed. Also, you started out by more or less accusing lemmy.world of being a monolith, going beyond assuming they're all the caricature view to saying they all believe things that no one in the non-monolith believes. I don't even like lemmy.world, but I spoke up guessing that I would have been included in that "vote blue" contingent you're talking about, trying to speak directly about what I think so we could talk about it.

        Now though we're talking about Hexbear and tankie-run spaces and transphobia and Putin. And all of a sudden we're not talking about the lemmy.world people, but aiming much more justified criticism at the actual Democratic candidacy. Maybe the whole galaxy of digression is my fault for throwing in a dig at the pro-imperialism people on the triad and inviting a response. IDK, I just brought it up because it just makes it hard to take them seriously. The people who prefer the US "team", in terms of the State Department and support for Israel, is nonexistent on lemmy.world. Y'all have a fantasy that it exists... you know what? I just had another attack of perspective.

        This whole conversation is a waste of time. If you want to talk to me about why I say the people you imagine who don't care about Palestine are nonexistent on lemmy.world, we can. If you want to talk to me about how voting for Kamala Harris was absolutely the right thing to do, we can do that. You can try to justify in the light of current world events how helpful it was to refuse to vote for her, how "condescending" was super important to assign weight and value to, but "snatched by ICE and sent forever to CECOT" was less important. If you just want to change to a variety of other topics, I'm not into it.

249 comments