We should try to be less hostile to people from other instances
I think we should try to be more careful, not to automatically assume that everyone who is asking questions here about China/Ukraine etc. is always arguing in bad faith. I've seen multiple people who were genuinely trying to ask something here and the only response they got was mockery.
I do understand that a lot of times people who come here are trying to troll or just be annoying, but we still should try to engage in them in good faith as long as there is no reason not to do so. Not everyone who isn't from Lemmygrad is someone hostile to our ideology, and we should try to be kinder to them.
One thing I have seen with this situation, is if someone is asking genuine questions, but gets some aggression (but also answers) they will act with confusion and frustration, not the "liberal smugness" what trolls have.
Explaining to these people that we do get a lot of trolls and people in bad faith asking similar questions is usually enough to help them understand. Someone who is actively against us from the start won't change their mind regardless of evidence, and someone who is curious isn't going to just automatically go away because some people were rude. The key there is some people though. If they only receive hostile responses, they will leave.
I always try to engage with people fairly, but at the same time you can usually tell very quickly when people are honestly just misinformed and when they are actively hostile/trolling. I often see people actually give long and detailed answers to folks who ask legitimate questions, even if it may seem readily apparent to us.
In many cases I think that it's still worth it. Even if someone does not engage in good faith, we can still explain ideas in accessible ways not necessarily for the benefit of the post office to which you are replying, but for the benefit of onlookers. I've heard discussions at length, especially in the context of twitter, that making arguments for the audience is an effective strategy at convincing people who may be on the fence.
No even if the only thing we can communicate is that we are not unthinking drones paid by the CPC, this can go a long way in promoting an interest in Marxism.
Others being said, I think anyone is perfectly justified in not engaging with trolls simply because it's not your job and you don't want to do it.
To be honest, I am not really sure if this strategy makes sense here. I don't think there are that many onlookers when you are arguing on Lemmygrad. If you are commenting on another instance that is a different story, but here, I doubt it.
Most of the time yes, but from time to time I see someone post something and the only comments they get are pretty hostile. Even if later it turns out they were just genuinely asking questions and even admitted to doing so. I think this just pushes some people away, that we could educate instead.
Of course then there are troll etc. which are different story.
we aren't perfect, I'm sure we do pop off too hard on new people sometimes, but I read through almost every post made here and I don't actually see it very often, even that one comment you linked wasn't too bad, he got a meme and one sarcastic comment, and then someone actually engaging. It's not like we told him to face the wall or anything
This was something the GenZhou sub was great for before it was taken down, even some troll lib/cons had conceded that they had quality discussions when they'd posted questions.
One thing I've started doing, if I reach an impasse/potentially confrontational argument, etc, is writing out an informative post on [email protected] and linking it in a short, polite reply to whomever I'm engaging with. Like this:
I have tried linking to write-ups on lemmygrad (perhaps even one by you the other day), and instead I'm met with:
Stop bullshitting. I’m not going to provide links to some neonazi sources about immigration and expect you to read that either. You’re a tankie and rashist and that’s pretty evident by your various comments on those topics. That makes you an extremist and clearly irrelevant to be taken into consideration in such discussions.
Plenty of people just refuse to read a source. It's just a continuation of the "this news source is biased therefore it's wrong therefore nothing it says can be trusted therefore you're a propagandist" game that they play. You can make valid points that can be independently verified and are themselves sourced, but if it's posted on lemmygrad, or some non-Western media outlet, it automatically gets dismissed.
The number of people who honestly want to engage is seemingly very small. Most people want to shout the things they hear from their chosen news source at any unwilling victim. It's hegemony of ideas, and they'll happily use any underhanded tactic to enforce it instead of engaging honestly.
Perhaps we could have a few pinned posts with FAQs? I'm seeing the same basic questions asked over and over again. It's becoming tiresome especially when it's debunking cold war/china bad propaganda 101. I really loved lurking lemmygrad over the past year because of how intelligent and interesting all of the content was from an ML perspective. I stopped using my account for a while because I didn't feel like I could add much to the discussion and just had a good time learning from others. Recently with all the liberals joining in I have to admit I've been baited into finding my account log in details. It's so frustrating to read through these long discussions every other day about XYZ false media narrative but I understand there are a lot of people who have never come across conflicting information to what they were taught in school/news. It can become a bit of a drain on your patience, it might be easier if it was all focused in one post people can be directed to.
This would be super helpful! I only have base level knowledge around communism, and it's so hard to find both information that isn't absolute western imperialist propaganda against communism, or any nuanced critiques from communists on China/Russia/etc. I think learning about the criticisms from an ML perspective and having them readily available would be valuable, because so many people think that communists pledge absolute unwavering support to anything even somewhat perceived as communist in the media, which I know isn't true, y'all are capable of critical thinking.
We have to be calm and mature and assume good faith until it's clearly been demonstrated that there's none. Even those people are not beyond saving. We're the adults in the room after all.
I think this is the most important thing for communism that we can do here. I totally get that this is a space for Marxists to speak freely, but I think educating the (educatable) people who wander in should be one of our priorities. It's work, no question about it, but education is the only way we get more Marxists. And they are certainly not going to teach it in western schools.
Should be, sure, but they won't. We don't win a people's revolution by just demanding the people (who have been poisoned against us) accept our ideas without question, even if their questions are just "why come you support Stalin when million billion dead evil tankies? You evil bads!"
(As an aside, I know we won't actually change anything here on lemmy, but that's not the goal. The way I see it, it's more important here online to practice explaining our position to people in a way they can understand so we can be more effective with that in our local communities.)
Che Guevara spoke a lot on this subject. He believed it was possible for any person to be a revolutionary, and a key part of bringing that out was sincerity and calm in critique and in public relations. There was no room in the cadres for people that threw temper tantrums when propagandized people didn't believe in the platform, which is something I frequently see here. I encourage everyone to take responsibility for the way they interact with others.
The way we treat the masses is incredibly important. We cannot be misanthropic keyboard warriors who disenfranchise others at the drop of a hat, because misanthropy is fundamentally opposed to our work. You cannot work for the masses if you cannot love them as well.
If you wish to be a part of a cadre someday (which you should) I encourage you to take this opportunity you have right now to work on your public relations skills, you're going to need it and this is as easy as it's going to get.
When tensions rise and the masses are ready to do work, they're not going to be led by a volatile comrade that shuts down at the mention of Uyghurs or Pol Pot. They will be led by people who can explain and disect the most flimsy narratives without trouble. Whether or not that person is honest and sincere in their analysis is another thing. That's why you are responsible for being the best comrade you can be.
I am not arguing against reactionaries or people who are bigoted, arguing in bad faith etc. But I've seen multiple times here people just now knowing something, asking and the only responses they got were too combative. I understand that it is often annoying to deal with these people, but we should at least try to educate them, as long as they are arguing in bad faith or just don't engage with them. And not being openly hostile to them.
I am not arguing against reactionaries or people who are bigoted, arguing in bad faith etc. But I've seen multiple times here people just now knowing something, asking and the only responses they got were too combative.
How are you making the distinction between trolls and good faith participation?
Can you share an example from your post history where you've patiently educated an account seemingly engaging in bad faith?
I agree. Don’t mock, educate. With facts, links, reading. If they continue to troll or their arguments become circular. Wish them well and end it. Others may read it and think better of MLs. Mocking or insulting may feel good in the moment, but looks bad over time.
But why? I completely understand having fun with people who are here to troll/argue in bad faith. I also completely understand just not wanting to engage with those people. But why would you argue to not try to educate people who came here in good faith?