this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2023
19 points (100.0% liked)

Fediverse

33086 readers
825 users here now

A community to talk about the Fediverse and all it's related services using ActivityPub (Mastodon, Lemmy, KBin, etc).

If you wanted to get help with moderating your own community then head over to [email protected]!

Rules

Learn more at these websites: Join The Fediverse Wiki, Fediverse.info, Wikipedia Page, The Federation Info (Stats), FediDB (Stats), Sub Rehab (Reddit Migration)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Too many people are confusing the two. Whenever lemmy.ml or its devs do something stupid, people go "Lemmy is getting worse and worse," or "I'm leaving Lemmy," or worse, "I'm leaving for Beehaw."

If you're using Beehaw, then you're using Lemmy. Lemmy is the software these instances run on. If you don't like lemmy.ml, join another instances that have rules that match your philosophy. Some instance hosts authoritarian or fascist shit? Turn to another Lemmy instance. Lemmy.ml is not even the biggest instance. People who just joined and are unfamiliar with the platform will just think the entire Lemmyverse is run by autocratic admins if we don't get our terminology right.

(page 2) 44 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago

It feels like this is more aimed at outing admins or mod teams that people will disagree with. I have no issue with any other Lemmy instance, because I'm not a member of their instance. The community will have some things to figure out as far as easily relating the nature of instances and the fediverse, which it looks like will take some trial and error.

There's things users will pick up on just fine, while the main complaint is "too many communities" where people desire a centralized system to replace Reddit with. It's my personal opinion that people only think they want a centralized system, and given the situation with Reddit, it highlights how beneficial of a concept the Fediverse and Lemmy itself is over a centralized system, but I digress.

Lemmy.ml's stances on Russia, China, and "tankies" is great....for them. I have no issue with how any other instance is run or what their community prefers for a style of moderation. They are free to run it as they see it. It's telling that it went from the largest instance to taking a backseat to many others though given the word got out prior to this post, and that's fine. I won't begrudge them over their instance's nature. It just makes me love Lemmy as a whole.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I actually haven't seen much mention of tankies on any Lemmy except as a joking reference here or there. I'm on lemmy.ml and the signup there said explicitly that it is a free software community. The signup had no particular reference to other politics, though I have no idea what is present in the admins' minds. There is also lemmygrad.ml which is explicitly socialist.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

If you haven't seen tankies denying genocide and/or saying the victims brought it on themselves, then, I suspect you haven't been looking very far in the comments of the news community there, to be fair. There are a lot of posters who will defend Russia, China, Syria etc all day long. All their crimes are apparently made up by "western media", (as if Jimmy Dore's basement isn't in the west.)

Fortunately, they're getting super buttmad lately at being downvoted so much.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

"leftists" nowadays who defend Russia seem extremely pathetic to me. The only thing Russia has in common with leftism is a general dislike for the activities of the United States. But there are many other groups who opposed the US, such as Nazi Germany, which doesn't necessarily make them your ally. As a Russian-american I can say that a lot of media and discourse on Russia in the west has incredibly poor overall quality, but it's not a CIA psyop, it's a combination of American exceptionalism, genuine issues, and zero cultural awareness.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I only see leftists defending Russia here and on Twitter. Internet is littered with those croks. Honestly been thinking in leaving social media as a whole. Would make me saner.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The trick is to curate your feed. Like a podcast? Find a community for that. Have a hobby or a hobby you are thinking of doing? Get some of those. You fill you feed with specific interest you like. If you want to check on news you specifically visit the that feed but you never join it or subscribe and you never look at the comments. Or you just read a newspaper. A proper one. If you want your social media to be fun you cant just doom scroll the r/all or whatever it's equivalent is called.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (18 children)

If you really care that much about "Authoritarians" and "Tankies", maybe you should just move to exploding-heads.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I, for one, fully support the explicitly antifascist politics of the core maintainers

[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Agreed. There is too much false equivalence of "Tankies" and fascists.

Fascists want to enslave your sisters and daughters and stick your trans friends in psych wards until they "decide" to stop being trans. They're fine with Blacks wallowing in poverty as second-class citizens and having militarized police on every streetcorner.

"Tankies" (Marxist-Leninists) believe in all the same progressive things other (so-called) Socialists do but have different views on historical figures and foreign policy, something that does not matter a bit in the here and now.

Here is the difference between Fascists and "Tankies": if it was proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that China was trying to exterminate the Ughyr people through mass execution, 95% of the "Tankies" out there, myself included, would disown China and denounce the genocide (this will not happen, because it isn't a genocide except in the broadest and most meaningless of terms). If it was proven beyond a doubt that the Holocaust happened (which it more or less has), the majority of Neo-Nazis would still say it was good.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Saying you'd denounce a genocide you deny is happening isn't accomplishing what you think it is.

People don't equate "tankies" with "fascists" because you advocate some sort of marxist-inspired system of governance... it's because denying the suffering of others when it's politically convenient is absolutely the opening strategy of the fascist playbook.

Also, "Disown China"??? Nothing wrong with liking other countries but the way you guys talk about them is off putting and doesn't come across as informed or even remotely unbiased.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Being "unbiased" is not a virtue. I am a Marxist. I judge people, governments, and ideas based off of a Marxist framework. That is my bias.

I give China the benefit of the doubt because they are, at least, claiming to be a Marxist state. This on its own puts them above any non-Marxist state.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Isn't claiming to be a Marxist state while still maintaining power within a small group of people (the inner party, a political version of the bourgeois) worse? By effectively being the same power structure, it allows critics to dismiss Marxist ideals as the same or worse. China is a particularly bad case as they disallow proper freedom of speech, basically castrating the proletariat. This harms perception of Marxism, hurting your case in arguing for it

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Isn’t claiming to be a Marxist state while still maintaining power within a small group of people (the inner party, a political version of the bourgeois) worse?

The Chinese system isn't perfect but I think questions like these put the cart before the horse. Is the Chinese system set up in such a way that, if bad actors got their way to the top, they would wield an immense amount of power? Yes, definitely. This question is separate from whether or not the people at the top right now are bad actors. And I think, like in any country, it's a mixed bag; there are oligarchs and business-industry plants and corrupt officials, but there's also well-meaning bureaucrats (Xi Jinping broadly fits into this category) and ideologically-driven Marxists.

The idea that Xi Jinping is a power-hungry dictator is an overblown trope. He is a fat, old, boring bureaucrat who got into office because he is an agreeable political moderate; a compromise between the ideological Marxist wing of the party and the pro-business Dengist wing.

As we saw in the Soviet Union, unrestricted Freedom of Speech is the downfall of Marxism. Home-grown Liberals are only the first issue; the United States government spends literally billions of dollars propping up anti-government organizations, whether that's Uyghur terrorist groups, the Falun Gong, Tibetan Independence movements, or "LGBTQ+ Rights" organizations who always seem to spend more time arguing for political liberalization than they do actual LGBTQ+ Rights (and, before you strawman me, I want to make my point here clear: LGBTQ+ Rights are good, but many such organizations in China are funded by foreign actors in order to disrupt Chinese politics. The bad things about them are not their LGBTQ+ Rights advocacy, but their advocacy for other forms of Liberalization that undermine Communism in China. If an LGBTQ+ Rights organization in China calls for the downfall of the CPC, they do not deserve to exist)

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago

Sorry, but you are exactly the kind of person everyone is talking about being awful.

I dare you, go to Taipei, Taichung, Kaohsiung, where there are much - vastly - greater lgbt rights, freedom of press, freedom of speech, freedom to protest, uncensored internet and media, etc, than in China, and tell anyone passing by this Xi bootlick spiel. Ask them if they're happy to see how Hong Kong has been treated.

He is far from harmless. He's an imperialist who, in his own words several times wants to use military force to impose his flag on millions of unwilling people who already have their own democracy.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think some of the foundations of your arguments are shaky at best.

Xi is a bad actor. He actively removes opponents, like his predecessor, Hu Jintao, who sat right fucking next to him and was publicly removed. Under Xi, China is asserting ownership of international waters in the South China Sea that have historically been either international waters or even owned by smaller nations. Under Xi, the Uyghers' and Mongolians' culture is actively being erased by outlawing local religious and cultural customs. I fail to see how any of these active are "agreeable" or "moderate". Going back to the Marxist theme, Uyghers and Mongolians are of the working class, too. Why should they be persecuted?

Free speech is the downfall of Marxism??? What? Seriously? The Soviet Union didn't fall because people were complaining. It fell because their systems weren't economically viable. While many of the domestic programs of the Soviet Union were excellent, the cost due to size versus productive population was prohibitive. Most of the USSR's land wasn't economically viable, but they held things together through totalitarianism, which again, isn't really empowering the workers. Once they let up on the totalitarianism, the cracks started to show. Maybe if the USSR was smaller and had managed their bureaucracy better, they could have succeeded, but that wasn't the case. It had nothing to do with freedom of speech. And if the workers can't voice their needs and desires, that's depriving workers of power, which is the opposite of Marxism. I don't think there has been a properly Marxist state.

I don't know where you're getting your information and history from or what your path is for your reasoning, but it really doesn't make sense to me

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago

Xi is a bad actor. He actively removes opponents, like his predecessor, Hu Jintao, who sat right fucking next to him and was publicly removed.

This is a bad conspiracy theory. Hu Jintao was allowed to sit at the table because he is an important historical figure. He's in his 80s and has Alzheimer's. He was having an episode at the table and was escorted out. The idea that he was publicly removed from building and disappeared is tabloid-level misinformation.

Under Xi, China is asserting ownership of international waters in the South China Sea that have historically been either international waters or even owned by smaller nations.

Nations fight over territorial waters all the time, whether it's Turkey or Kenya or China. There are EEZ disputes in the North Sea between Norway, Denmark, Iceland, and the UK. Why should I care whether China or the Philippines own the Spratly Islands? What does it have to do with China being Marxist or not? I really don't understand why you even brought it up.

Under Xi, the Uyghers' and Mongolians' culture is actively being erased by outlawing local religious and cultural customs.

Neither their local religion nor cultural customs are being infringed upon. If anything, the re-education programs in Xinjiang seek to remove recent (90s-now) religious influence from Arabian missionaries, who have spread Modernist interpretations of Islam that are what is endangering local Traditionalist Islam in Xinjiang.

The one thing I would actually agree is an issue is language - the biggest sticking point in Mongolia is that recently public schools have been mandated to teach in Mandarin. However, nothing is being done to prevent locals from speaking Mongolian at home; the goal is just to guarantee that all people in China are fluent in Chinese, while a Mongolian-language school system means some amount of people are just never learning Chinese. Cultural assimilation isn't even really the goal; not knowing Chinese is correlated with worse career prospects for indigenous people in China.

And of course, most countries in the world, including the U.S., mandate that public schools teach in the official language. This is nothing new nor unique to China.

There is a similar problem in Tibet, where in addition to the above issues, boarding schools are being mandated for rural children because it's less expensive to have a large, centrally located boarding school in low-density areas than managing a public school in every remote Tibetan village (China recently outlawed private schools, which I think is a big plus for equality of opportunity).

load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›