Lemmy's gaining popularity, so I thought new people should see this.
Lemmy's gaining popularity, so I thought new people should see this.
cross-posted from: https://feddit.nl/post/16246531
I feel like we need to talk about Lemmy's massive tankie censorship problem. A lot of popular lemmy communities are hosted on lemmy.ml. It's been well known for a while that the admins/mods of that instance have, let's say, rather extremist and onesided political views. In short, they're what's colloquially referred to as tankies. This wouldn't be much of an issue if they didn't regularly abuse their admin/mod status to censor and silence people who dissent with their political beliefs and for example, post things critical of China, Russia, the USSR, socialism, ...
As an example, there was a thread today about the anniversary of the Tiananmen Massacre. When I was reading it, there were mostly posts critical of China in the thread and some whataboutist/denialist replies critical of the USA and the west. In terms of votes, the posts critical of China were definitely getting the most support.
I posted a comment in this thread linking to "https://archive.ph/2020.07.12-074312/https://imgur.com/a/AIIbbPs" (WARNING: graphical content), which describes aspects of the atrocities that aren't widely known even in the West, and supporting evidence. My comment was promptly removed for violating the "Be nice and civil" rule. When I looked back at the thread, I noticed that all posts critical of China had been removed while the whataboutist and denialist comments were left in place.
This is what the modlog of the instance looks like:
Definitely a trend there wouldn't you say?
When I called them out on their one sided censorship, with a screenshot of the modlog above, I promptly received a community ban on all communities on lemmy.ml that I had ever participated in.
Proof:
So many of you will now probably think something like: "So what, it's the fediverse, you can use another instance."
The problem with this reasoning is that many of the popular communities are actually on lemmy.ml, and they're not so easy to replace. I mean, in terms of content and engagement lemmy is already a pretty small place as it is. So it's rather pointless sitting for example in /c/[email protected] where there's nobody to discuss anything with.
I'm not sure if there's a solution here, but I'd like to urge people to avoid lemmy.ml hosted communities in favor of communities on more reasonable instances.
You're viewing a single thread.
All instances, except for the lightly moderated ones, have censorship issues from time to time. You can say one thing on one thread, and that same thing can get you banned in another thread on the same instance. This is an issue with the great degree of political polarization on Lemmy.
My point is that Lemmy is multipolar. It’s divided between the right-leaning instances like Lemmy.world and sh.itjust.works, the left-leaning instances like Lemmy.ml, slrpnk.net, blahaj.zone, and dbzer0, and the leftist instances like Hexbear.net and Lemmygrad.ml. Mods and admins on each instance are guilty of maintaining the “instance line.”
When I called them out on their one sided censorship, with a screenshot of the modlog above, I promptly received a community ban on all communities on lemmy.ml that I had ever participated in.
While I won't repeat what got me banned, this is what got me banned from Political Memes on Lemmy.world, this isn't just a Lemmy.ml thing. This is also when one of the moderators claimed they weren't censoring anyone and were incredibly fair on a comment chain calling out their censorship, and refused to elaborate. They would not even tell me how I could edit my comments to comply with their rules.
What does this all mean?
Honestly, I think close to everyone knows that Marxists dominate Lemmy.ml, Lemmygrad.ml, Hexbear.net, etc. I think close to everyone knows Liberals dominate Lemmy.world. I think everyone knows that anarchists dominate dbzer0, slrpnk.net, Hexbear.net, etc.
If your call to action is to defederate Lemmy.ml, then that's just contributing to this polarization effect, as people would jump ship from .world and .ml to the other if it fits their views better. If your call to action is that people should move communities from Lemmy.ml to other instances, this has already happened a bit, this thread gets reposted very frequently. All it really seems to me is that you're spreading drama.
What do I recommend?
Rather than trying to consolidate communities across instances, replicate communities as needed. Communities on Lemmy are more like hashtags for an instance, and instances are more like subreddits of old. Instances have their own cultures and values, so a Gaming thread on Hexbear, for example, is going to be different from a Lemmy.world Gaming thread, and that's a good thing. All sorting can still let you see other instances, there's no need to risk moderator dominance over communities by trying to consolidate on a single instance. Heck, this community is an example of that very process.
Lemmy.world and sh.itjust.works don't seem to have any noticeable political leanings (far right or far left) as far as I can tell. Why do you say they're right leaning?
Lemmy.world and sh.itjust.works don’t seem to have any noticeable political leanings as far as I can tell.
...What?
I consider myself a raging liberal, at least in the US. A socialist. But lemmy.world is so liberal it makes me feel like a Trumpster.
I guess I don't feel at risk of getting globally banned like I would for disagreeing with the consensus like on .ml, but claiming .world is neutral is quite a sweeping statement.
There are definitely some bad actors on here who are trying to manipulate the election in Trump's favor. The sort that claim to be leftists and come to every US politics-related thread (or even ones that aren't related to the US until they make it so) with their list of talking points about why no one should vote for Harris, but conveniently have no answers for who deserves votes more.
Because anyone not exactly in line with his views is right leaning, that's it. Tankies want to shame you into their ideology by calling you right leaning for thinking murder is bad, that's basically all.
I can DM you if you want, this is already spiraling far beyond my intentions of my original statement, that I think it's better rather than to consolidate communities and overpower an instances mods and admins, to decentralize and replicate so there's always a space for people, on an as-needed basis.
The short answer is that Lemmy.world is a very US-focused liberal instance, essentially the Democrats embodied in an instance.
Sh.itjust.works maintains NCD, MeanwhileOnGrad, and other generally pro-Liberalism, anti-Communist communities, hence why I say it leans right.
As always, you can absolutely find Anarchists and Communists on both Lemmy.world and sh.itjust.works, my point is more that the moderators and userbase generally consolidate around a given stance, my point isn't that you can't be a leftist on Lemmy.world or sh.itjust.works.
from the perspective of a south american, yes, .world is biased towards north america and europe.
That's not really what I mean, I'm talking about leaning far right or left on the political spectrum. I think both of them are based in NA, so it would make sense they're more focused there, just like midwest.social
World is kind of the vanilla instance.
Just.works is a "free speech" instance, I never see many communities hosted there, but a large amount of trolls make accounts there because just.works is unlikely to nuke an account.
Lately sh.itjust.works been more good about nuking spam and troll accounts, and they also have automated defenses set up to mitigate abuse.
I don't fully understand but it turns out if you don't think both Donald and Harris are equally fascist you are a classic liberal and pretty far to the right.
They're not equally fascist.
It's fascism lite vs fascism deluxe!
Right? The system is awful that lite is the best of the options that will actually happen. And yet here you are, every day campaigning for fascism deluxe by telling everyone who chooses lite that they are genocidal goose-steppers.
Harris wouldn't support genocide if she knew it would cost her the election. There would be an arms embargo by now if it weren't for her voters reassuring her; "No no, it's okay! You can kill anyone you want and start WW3 and we'll still vote for you."
But calling you all genocidal goose-steppers isn't fair. You're just cynical. You fundamentally do not believe you can change anything.
Sure. But unfortunately the country is so diseased with far-right radicals that even for people absolutely opposed to Gaza as a primary motivation, such as Uncommitted (you going to call them genocidal as well?), she is still the least bad option.
But that's kinda my point, though. Anybody with radical ideas like "Donald will make this worse," will fail .ml purity testing, regardless of their stance on economics. And so much so that you'll call them a goose-stepper.
Again, like I said, calling y'all genocidal goose-steppers wasn't fair of me to do. I'm sorry I hurt your feelings. I was mad.
Your cynicism is a tragedy. You can only imagine two outcomes. Either everything gets worse under Trump or things stay as bad as they are right now under Harris. There's no other options in your mind. You are too cynical to imagine anything else.
And so you attack anyone who refuses to vote for genocide and then get offended when they strike back. Did it occur to you that I was lashing out because other .world posters were dogpiling on me in various threads and attacking me? Or do my feelings not matter?
Neither .world nor .shitjustworks are “right leaning” they just hate the tankies most vocally lmao. Neither would it make too much sense to call a tankie “left” leaning given their raging hard on for authoritarianism. I also think most of Blahaj would be offended by being lumped in with them.
Lemmy.world is extremely liberal, I wouldn't classify it as left-leaning. Both .world and sh.itjust.works are generally liberal, maintaining MeanwhileOnGrad leads to more right-wing people. I did not say far-right, or even right-wing, but right-leaning.
Marxists are absolutely left wing, not sure what your point is here. Marx and Engels were both called "authoritarian" by their contemporaries so much that Engels wrote On Authority. I don't think it makes sense to separate Marxism from Leftism, and redefine leftism as Anarchism.
muh libs aren’t left leaning
And you expect me to take anything you say after that seriously
By the standards of US and Canadian politics, yeah we're to the left of center. But "center" has been dragged to the right so far that it's prompting this whole argument. The Overton window had shifted so far that liberalism - which, in a current context, supports relatively unregulated capitalism and trickle down economics - there's a whole swath of political ideologies that's basically nonexistent within our modern day electoral politics. I'm somewhere in the anarchist range and choose to engage with electoral politics - if they chose to participate within the context of a FPTP voting system with two options, we'd find ourselves voting for the same candidate despite our likely highly differing political beliefs. In many countries that left wing is less smashed, the range of political discourse is much wider.
Shit just works is to the left side of, but comfortably within, the current Canadian Overton window. In a global sense, the instance is kinda to the right, in the same way that Bernie Sanders is moderate by western European standards.
When I say Leftist, I am using the typical definition, anti-Capitalist. Socialism, Communism, Syndicalism, Anarchism, and all their myriad forms.
When I say right, I am using the typical definition, supportive of Capitalism. Social Democrats, Liberals, American Libertarians, fascists, and all their myriad forms.
Considering Lemmy is an international site, it doesn't make sense to use the Overton Window. If we went by, say, the American Overton Window, but another user lived in, say, Spain, there's a significant difference there. That's why I am using the standard definitions, and not going off of any one country's Overton Window.
When I say right, I am using the typical definition, supportive of Capitalism. Social Democrats, Liberals, American Libertarians, fascists, and all their myriad forms.
For two of the words this is not a typical definition. Social democrats do not code as "right" anywhere in the world. And liberals are only "right" when viewed through a partisan US-progressive lens, or else perhaps in southern Europe (where the word is mostly an economic term). Elsewhere they would be closer to left or center. This whole discussion illustrates the limited usefulness of the left-right axis at describing ideas.
Social democrats do not code as “right” anywhere in the world.
Except in Portugal, where the conservative party calls themselves Social Democrats.
True but that is a proper name, not the generic definition. Russia's Liberal Democrats are ultranationalists.
Social democrats do not code as "right" anywhere in the world.
Are you trying to say that wherever Social Democrats are found, they are the most left available? That may track, but again, Social Democrats want to "harness Capitalism," it isn't pro-Socialism nor anti-Capitalism, hence my categorization.
And liberals are only "right" when viewed through a partisan US-progressive lens, or else perhaps in southern Europe (where the word is mostly an economic term)
Liberalism is the ideological framework for Capitalism, this is, again, supportive of Capitalism and against Socialism.
This is a bit reductive. I accept that liberalism and capitalism are closely intertwined in the historical reading. But the fact is that capitalism won the economic battle, for better and (I agree) for worse. Attempts to replace it completely, in an interconnected world, invariably end in disaster or (China) in a reversion to capitalism. Just look at the list of them. To me this whole question feels like a disconnected high-school philosophy debate.
I don't think this is a good place to have this convo, but I firmly disagree with what you've said here. I understand if you don't want to, but if you want to discuss this further you can shoot me a DM.
Seriously? I'm not trying to convince you, I'm trying to convince the people reading us. That's the way a forum debate works! But I admire your earnestness.
My biggest issue is with these two statements:
But the fact is that capitalism won the economic battle, for better and (I agree) for worse.
Attempts to replace it completely, in an interconnected world, invariably end in disaster or (China) in a reversion to capitalism.
For the former, I disagree because AES states still exist, and Marx's analysis has retained it's usefulness at full capacity.
For the latter, most AES states were and are dramatic improvements on previous conditions, such as the fascist slaver Batista regime in Cuba compared to now, where life expectancy is 50% higher than under Batista and disparity is far lower.
As for the PRC, it isn't correct to say it "reverted to Capitalism." It's more correct to say that Mao failed to jump to Communism, and Deng reverted back to a more Marxist form of Socialism, compatible with China's existing level of development. The Private Sector is a minority of the economy in the PRC, the majority is in the public sector. Here's an excerpt from Engels in The Principles of Communism:
Will it be possible for private property to be abolished at one stroke?
No, no more than existing forces of production can at one stroke be multiplied to the extent necessary for the creation of a communal society. In all probability, the proletarian revolution will transform existing society gradually and will be able to abolish private property only when the means of production are available in sufficient quantity.
Mao tried to skip the necessary developmental stage. Marx wasn't a Utopian, he didn't believe Socialism was good because it was more moral, but because Capitalism creates the conditions for Socialism, ie public ownership and central planning, through formation of monopolist syndicates. Marx says as much himself in Manifesto of the Communist Party:
The essential conditions for the existence and for the sway of the bourgeois class is the formation and augmentation of capital; the condition for capital is wage-labour. Wage-labour rests exclusively on competition between the labourers. The advance of industry, whose involuntary promoter is the bourgeoisie, replaces the isolation of the labourers, due to competition, by the revolutionary combination, due to association. The development of Modern Industry, therefore, cuts from under its feet the very foundation on which the bourgeoisie produces and appropriates products. What the bourgeoisie therefore produces, above all, are its own grave-diggers. Its fall and the victory of the proletariat are equally inevitable.
The PRC increases ownership of and eventually folds into the Public Sector companies and industries that form these monopolist syndicates.
For further reading re: China, Socialism Developed China, Not Capitalism is a good modern essay. For elaboration on Marx and the transition to Socialism, I recommend Why Public Property?
The reason I didn't want to have this conversation on Lemmy.world is that I have had similar comments to this one removed for "misinformation."
Hang on now. Fascists are historically the "third position" (which is why both the left and the right got together in about 1939 to stomp their collective shit in.) They're neither "right" nor "left."
Fascism is described as both "Capitalism in decay" and as "Imperialism turned inward." It served and serves the bourgeoisie and petite bourgeoisie against the Proletariat and Lumpenproletariat, and historically arises when the Petite Bourgeoisie is facing proletarianization. That's why the most violently MAGA are small business owners and the like, and why they think immigrants are the ones proletarianizing them.
I highly recommend reading the first chapter of Blackshirts and Reds by Dr. Michael Parenti, which covers the material conditions surrounding fascism and who it served.
Fascism has been described as a teacher telling a student to shut up in class too, just because someone says something doesn't make it true.
Sure, so can you explain what you disagree with about what I have said, and why you believe fascism to not be left nor right? I am aware of "Third Positionists," they serve Capitalists and arise from Capitalist decay.
It's going to be useless to explain it to you, you've already made up your mind, and since I'm no longer shitting and have things to do today I'm going to have to decline your request to waste my time explaining natsocs.
Since you linked to another Wikipedia article, you should know that Wikipedia defines fascism as far-right:
Fascism is a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement, characterized by a dictatorial leader, centralized autocracy, militarism, forcible suppression of opposition, belief in a natural social hierarchy, subordination of individual interests for the perceived good of the nation or race, and strong regimentation of society and the economy.
And it also defines it as third position, as per the article I linked earlier. Again, some define fascism as "mommy said I can't go to the party" so oooooohhhhh.
Fact of the matter is fascists, if you've ever talked to a real one, are neither capitalist nor communist (again, hence that whole "World War Two" fiasco they teamed up for.) Thus "third position."
No, the article you linked says "The Third Position is a set of neo-fascist political ideologies". It does not say that fascism in general is neither left or right. I'm not talking about the word "fascist" used as an insult.
"From the article I linked:"
The term "Third Position" was coined in Europe and the main precursors of Third Position politics were Italian fascism, Legionarism, Falangism, Prussian socialism, National Bolshevism (a synthesis of far-right ultranationalism and far-left Bolshevism) and Strasserism (a radical, mass-action, worker-based form of Nazism, advocated by the "left-wing" of the Nazi Party by brothers Otto and Gregor Strasser, until it was crushed in the Night of the Long Knives in 1934). Neo-fascist, neo-Nazi author Francis Parker Yockey had proposed an alliance between communists and fascists called the red-brown alliance (Red being the color of communism and Brown being the color of Nazism). Yockey lent support to Third World liberation movements as well.
In the United States, Political Research Associates argues that Third Position politics has been promoted by some white nationalist and neo-Nazi groups such as the National Alliance, American Front, Traditionalist Worker Party, Patriot Front, and White Aryan Resistance, as well as some black nationalist groups, such as the Nation of Islam, since the late 20th century.[16] In 2010, the American Third Position Party (later renamed American Freedom Party) was founded in part to channel the right-wing populist resentment engendered by the financial crisis of 2007–08 and the policies of the Obama administration.
During his early years in Nazi Party as SS-Gauführer, Nazi leader Heinrich Himmler worked briefly as a deputy of Gregor Strasser, then head of party propaganda department. Influenced heavily by Strasserist ideas, Himmler attacked capitalism and viewed socialism as "the natural economic system" during the 1920s.[4] Germany's Chancellor, General Kurt von Schleicher (in office 1932–33), attempted to induce the more left-wing Strasserist segment of the Nazi Party to merge with the trade unions as way of forcing Hitler to support his government, but his plan failed.
Jfc lmao. You're wrong, deal with it loser. Neither right nor left, "Third Position."
Fascists paint themselves as being a third position that supercedes the left-right dichotomy, but that doesn't mean it's actually true. Everything about it is right-wing and it's not actually as incompatible with capitalism as fascists claim. Every fascist regime has partnered up with capitalists, who often support them into power in the first place.
Cowbee is notorious for not actually answering questions, just throwing up the same articles to read and asking people to DM them to continue the conversation. Make what you will of that info - are deeds done in the light of logical discourse inherently "better" than those done in darkness, i.e. are facts that can stand up to scrutiny somehow more "correct" than those that can only be whispered in the dark to those most vulnerable individuals still living in the cave?
You'll note that I did end up continuing the conversation publicly in this thread. I have only once actually taken a conversation into DMs, with Blaze, whom they can probably back me up on. When I say "feel free to DM if you have any questions" regarding theory I have linked, it's because I don't expect anyone to immediately buzz off and read a book or article and then get right back, it's an open offer to continue the conversation at any point in time.
Can you elaborate on what you mean by not actually answering questions? In this thread you can see it''s the exact opposite, I am curious what you mean by that.
Finally, when I make my arguments and leave links for supplemental reading, it isn't a requirement to continue conversation. It's supplemental, in case they have doubts or wish to learn more beyond a simple Lemmy thread. If it's necessary reading, I usually quote a relevant paragraph and link the main work.
Being full of anticommunists who call anyone left of Biden a tankie makes an instance right wing in my eyes at least
They… don’t though? Unless you’re pretending saying “voting for [not the democratic candidate] is a vote for Trump” is now apparently right wing and not just a basic understanding of how first past the post works.
Like, your definition is both wrong in terms of what right wing means, and not even descriptive of either. They’re just not tankie shitholes so I guess that makes them look bad to you?
So accusing left wingers of being right wing is okay as far as you're concerned if it's about an election
Pointing out that from a left wing perspective, Biden and the Democrats are doing bad things and their supporters are right wing: wrong, not descriptive, belongs in a tankie shit hole.
K
That’s… not an accurate characterization.
I would have voted for Sanders in a heartbeat. And a lot of other (Americans) on my instance would too. The disdain is more targeted and nuanced than that. A whole lot of us on sh.it just.works have a reasonably solid understanding of the difference between communism and authoritarian communism, and are also often geopolitical nerds to one degree or another. This often leads to us doing our best to combat what we see as bullshit disinformation and misrepresentation when and where we see it.
The vitriol we have towards tankies is specifically a result of:
- our dislike of the glorification of historical authoritarian leaders (Stalin; Mao)
- the intentional blurring of the line between communism (which, bluntly, many of us don’t actually have a problem with) and authoritarian communism
- the jingoistic support of modern authoritarian states that either call themselves “communist” despite not really being anything of the sort (China), or who have a historical lineage that runs through an (again, authoritarian) communist state (Russia)
When looked at that way, it’s a lot closer to modern Iron Front ideology (anti-monarchy; anti-fascist; anti-authoritarian communist).
That's... what? What?! WHAT!?
To anyone else reading, note the @lemmy.ml after their name. There are only so many times people of intelligence can hear the most batshit insane things on Lemmy without either willfully losing IQ points or else blocking the lemmy.ml instance.
Unfortunately, that does next to nothing, bc you'll still see every single batshit insane comment like the above. Every. Single. One. And while it might be a bug, you can sometimes get replies from them too (while other times blissfully not).
Maybe I'll make an account on Lemmy.cafe, which is the only instance I've ever heard of that has actually defederated from lemmy.ml. Though I'm holding out more hope for Sublinks, Piefed, and Mbin too to help address such issues.
Stay safe folks - election season is coming and there are some who want to fuck you up if at all possible (not necessarily the above comment, just in general), don't let it happen!
So... blocking an instance as a user just hides the instances communities, if I'm remembering the implementation details right. It doesn't block interaction with the instances users. Stupidly misleading.
You'll still need to block the users one by one.
Sadly, I had quite the list going, but upon blocking the instance, decided to clean up all the individual ones from that instance. Oops. Surely a "block" would imply some sort of... I dunno, "blocking" action, one might expect?
Also, at least on 0.19.3, I would not receive notifications from people on those instances. But now on 0.19.5, I do. So... there's that fun little tidbit of knowledge: what little blocking there used to be, has become less so over time.
Oh well, at least this way I get to read the most batshit insane replies to things and laugh at them. Once someone is aware, it's not really shocking, compared to a new user who would have no clue - e.g. they could be conversing with an actual PhD scientist on mander.xyz one moment and then somehow jump all the way to "no awkshually you should drink bleach, and follow up by drinking sunshine, bc (this one time at band camp?) I heard that kills the Rona". Which sounds enormously exaggerated I know, but just remember: there are people out there eating raw meat and drinking unpasteurized milk without a care in the world, even in the face of the avian flu situation that seems to have made its way into just about every animal on earth including extremely remote polar bears and such.
Disinformation, unlike misinformation that is more often simply a mistake, is often designed to be outright deadly, to the unprepared (though less for the sake of the actual deaths, and more for how they would then catapult the issue into the media to receive feed-forward attention).
If you're planning on leaving I won't miss you passive aggressively using only neutral pronouns for me or calling me insane.