EDIT: no, I don’t sympathize with nazis (neither I sympathize with those who call everyone nazi when they’re losing an argument ;)
Fuck that. Defederate all Nazis.
More like de-head-erate all nazis lmao
This post assumes that a meaningful amount of defed instances are caused by simple lack of agreement. Often, it’s an orthogonal matter - it boils down to instance A actually understanding something about the userbase of instance B and saying “I’m not dealing with this shit, it’ll make the instance worse for its own users”. For example: the typical user of B might be disingenuous, or preach immoral prescriptions, behave like a chimp, or be a bloody stupid piece of trash that should’ve stayed in Reddit to avoid smearing its stupidity everywhere here.
Are instance admins too eager to pull the trigger for defed? Perhaps, in some cases; specially because it handles groups of users instead of individuals. But those cases are better addressed through actual examples, not through a meme talking on generic grounds.
No offense but this is kind of what happens in real life too. Nazi shows up to local bar. Barman or owner doesn’t throw them out. Eventually they invite their friends. It winds up being known a Nazi bar. People who don’t want to associate with Nazis no longer visit the bar. This is why intolerance of the intolerant is a thing.
Funny thing is, the Nazis would use those same guilty by association tactics to silence and crush dissent.
Lmao “try and understand them” fuck off, OP. You’re not fooling anyone. There’s no point trying to understand assholes.
Nazi is a communist term for delegitimizing a legitimate sovereign nation. Cope with it. Churchill said so.
defederate to maintain your very special echo chamber
defederate to stop sh.tjust.works chuds from harassing your comrades in DMs with violent, transphobic and ableist attacks
other way around, buddy
Nazis do not deserve to live. I don’t see the problem.
I’m so glad that the comments have (mostly) finally unified in agreement that defederating Nazis and other hideous people is the right move.
Unless the nazi wears red, then let him spew his holocaust denial because “western propaganda imperialism butwhatabout they deserved it it never happened.”
I’m not up to date on the drama. Who got defeded?
What a simple, stupid argument.
You can’t enter a discussion with somebody who’s just trying to bombard you into submission. OP is wildly ignorant or just somebody sad they’re being defederated on a different account.
lol its this shit every time libs see a legitimate left stance. im assuming you’ve seen the sh.itjust.works defed post. its like 5 super vocal users having a conniption fit that there are communists on the internet
If the ‘thing you dont agree’ with is hate speech or shit promotting violence for example that’s the only sane option you have lol
Yes. Tolerance should not extend to intolerance, and intolerance should never be a thing we tolerate.
If it were that simple, then it would be fine.
But the point is, people just start to label anything that whiffs of a different opinion as “intolerance”.
Find me one neoliberal who isn’t promoting violence.
Here’s a comment thread where a Hexbear user said “I hope to kill people like you” because I simply said I supported democratic socialism.
Going on any Hexbear instance people froth over telling anyone right of Karl Marx to “get up against the wall”. You guys are, and will always be, a joke.
because I simply said I supported democratic socialism.
so you promoted violence first?
i’m failing to see your complaint hereOh silly you.
Haha, classic Catradora_Stalinism, what a rascal.
She would make a great staffer in the Lubyanka.
She’s probably like 16 dude chill and welcome to the Internet where people fling the most unhinged nonsense at each other without a second thought
An aggressive communist with no sense of how the world works could be a child? You’re the most self aware Hexbear user.
Also lol to “dude chill”. I’m not the one fantasizing about murdering people.
You said you supported Social Democracy not Democratic Socialism. Dem Socs are well-meaning but idealistic, not optimistic but the political philosophy of idealism. Soc Dems are supporters of a kinder capitalism for the Imperial core but keeping the child slaves mining cobalt in the Congo.
The fact that you think these are the same proves the original posters point that you should read theory. They were harsh but you were implying that keeping exploitation of the third world is preferable to socialism.
Dude you still don’t stop worker exploitation, don’t solve the contradiction of working and capitalist classes, don’t end imperialism or colonialism (social democracy outsources exploitation to the third world)
Ok let me know how your method works out
You said you supported Social Democracy not Democratic Socialism.
What a terrible mistake to make! Perhaps you should have assumed it was the correct orientation of the two words that are spelled exactly the same.
The fact that you think these are the same proves the original posters point that you should read theory.
I have, but thanks for the suggestion.
Assuming people are using words in the way they are widely and commonly accepted to mean (I mean, just look at Wikipedia for an easy starting point) is not a bad thing?
I’m innudated with endless notifications from you dweebs, mistakes happen.
The abolishinists were mean to me. : 😭😭
The tankies were being tankies, not unexpected.
youre getting into arguments where you don’t know what the words mean, and then acting indignant when people point that out
What a terrible mistake to make! Perhaps you should have assumed it was the correct orientation of the two words that are spelled exactly the same.
Your beef is with the English Language not me. How is it my fault that you misidentified yourself? Funnily enough, you still don’t identify your actual political position. It’s clear that the only political position you’d take is what gives you an advantage in the argument. Fucking debatebros lol.
I have, but thanks for the suggestion.
Reading so much theory that you confuse two different political ideologies. Sometimes I read so much theory that that I claim to be a monarchist when I really mean to say I’m an anti-monarchist. Obviously the other person should have understood what I meant. Your literally on a communication medium that allows you to plan and edit your comments. You have no excuse for making this grade school mistake.
Debatebro? That’s what Hexbear does best.
I would actually love to engage in good faith discussions, but Hexbear users only operate in bad faith, particularly by sealioning. Like clockwork, you don’t engage in ideas but rather give reading assignments.
I’ve read Das Kapital and agree with virtually all the premises about how society is unfair to those who actually generate the surplus value and think that we need to fix a system that breaks cyclically, as Karl Marx correctly predicted in volume I. The only solutions I’ve seen presented are a total revolution a la 1917, which occured before globalization. Anything close to this in the current globalized world will kill at minimum hundreds of millions globally due to interdependence on products that Marx would consider “needs”, such as medications and medical equipment like dialysis machines.
The difference between you and me is that I’d rather work to reestablish democracy away from capital interests. I don’t want a dictatorship, I want a functional democracy. Propaganda is often used to disillusion the working class from democracy, and if you don’t vote in elections then you are clearly part of the problem.
Edit: Lmao. Citing"theory" gets crickets from the people who endlessly say “you just haven’t read theory”. It’s like they don’t know what to do with someone who reads to understand, rather than “reading” just to virtue signal.
Defederating brigaders and trolls is necessary to maintain a healthy community. If your instance is defederated from all major instances, perhaps you should look examine what sort of company you keep.
With that mentality we’ll all become beehaw. The cesspool of don’t look at me funny.
It’s intriguing how everyone that views themselves as moderates/liberals forget (or are unacquainted with it) about the paradox of tolerance.
Tolerance implies everyone has a right to express their ideas and you want that. You want everything out in the open, so you can pick at it, dismantle it and render it pitiful, ridiculous and useless.
You want the intolerant crying out loud that you are intolerant as that means you are doing the right thing. The intolerant want silence, forced, while the tolerant want noise, anger, tension.
Remember that anything worthwhile needs to be fought for. Don’t regret being vocal and harsh towards intolerance.
That is a pretty ironic comment because that is not what the paradox of tolerance is at all. The paradox of tolerance is that intolerance needs to be suppressed for tolerance to exist, since tolerance can’t exist alongside intolerance.
The paradox is that tolerance needs to be intolerant towards intolerance in order for a tolerant society to exist, literally the exact opposite of what you wrote.
You can’t tolerate nazis or tankies. Bad reasoning altogether. Look at the state the USA is in right now because we decided to tolerate fascists.
One of those groups is white supremacists and the other wants to stop genociding the global south. That seems like a fine comparison to you?