Rimu published yet another hit piece against the /0 instance and this time posted it in his own instance comms as well. One of his mods jumped in, admitted they don't know anything about anything, but nevertheless felt confident enough to state their opinion as fact and in the process insult all of us collectively, then stickied his opinion for good measure.
So I decided to reply sarcastically, at which point that mod insulted me and locked the thread, which is apparently a feature in piefed which simply hides/deletes further replies in that thread, but since it's not a feature in lemmy, it appears to function like a shadow delete.
This is what my last reply would have been.
(Yes I'm being snarky, but that "I'm so mature" bullshit just rubs me the wrong way.)
In my opinion, using mod powers to get the last insult in, is just bastard behaviour.
More like, plenty of communities (think MoG-snark communities and the like) love to shit on "libs" and call them fascists and/or nazis. And, if pressed, they'd say it's because Liberals are collaborating with fascists and Nazis, so there's no real difference between them.
I don't think that's even a particularly adversarial take -- do you agree that happens in Leftist, anti-MoG type spaces?
i have never seen people shitting on libs at all on MoG. so i guess i would say its more a nonsensical take.
if the political party that you're demanding everyone vote for is supporting (politically, militarily, economically) a fascist ethnostate run an extermination campaign, you're gonna get called a fascist.
this is precise usage, not loose pejorative (ie how 'tankie' gets used)
I didn't say in MoG, I said in anti-MoG spaces.
No it's not it's decidedly not precise. That's the point. They call "Libs" Nazis and fascists because they believe that libs sweep for/support those groups.
Likewise, people use "tankie" as a perjorative against authoritarian communists and people who they believe sweep for/support them.
vague; are you attempting to make an allusion to hexbear.net/c/slop? like yeah there's gonna be people who are not favorable to anticommunism, plus the comm is for all forms of reactionary bullshit, lemmy bullshit just happens to show up there occasionally. MoG isn't even on the front page there right now, nor is it anywhere in top.
supporting a genocide with billions in weapons and diplomatic cover is material, direct support. that's precise. that's the complaint that i've seen making about people who uncritically support political parties which have been doing this. 'sweeping for' is vague accusation with no clear criterion, bordering on wrongthink.
'authoritarian communists' is also imprecise. authoritarian by whose definition? the US is authoritarian, we have the highest incarceration rate on earth. if you can't pay rent or otherwise secure housing you essentially end up unpersoned. if you're just somebody living in a country that's opposed to the US you will be subjected to misery via economic warfare under the guise of peaceful status quo (sanctions). 'tankie' isn't used for US supporters, no matter how authoritarian it is, it's used for anyone opposing US imperialism.
Yup, places like that.
So on the one hand, Liberals == actual Nazis, simple as. No nuance needed. But on the other hand, not all communists support authoritarian communism, and what does that actually even mean, etc.
If that's your honest take, then we're just fundamentally not going to agree.
you started this claiming piefed's intended exclusion of 'tankies' wasn't anti-communist. my point is simply that what matters if a given communist is to get called 'tankie' or not is how willing they are to toe the line against americas enemies.
the US is authoritarian, it has been the hegemon and projects that domination around the world, choosing to have more ire for it than its enemies gets you labeled 'tankie'. i can only conclude that the desire to exclude tankies stems from a desire to censor critics of us imperialism.
i said that they're fascists because while in power the party materially, directly supported a genocidal ethnostate. if you're not shouting from the rafters that it needs to stop, but are instead browbeating people to uncritically support them and silencing and berating people critical of them, then you're part of that.
i mean any given liberal could simply stop supporting the ethnostate doing a genocide and you wouldn't get called a fascist, but that would require some ability for introspection
And I disagree. Shall we keep going in circles?
if you're done being evasive and can't muster up an actual response then i guess we're done here.
I haven't been evasive, I've been succinct. We don't all need to gish-gallop and build out massive, loaded narratives to try and salvage a take.
But since you're just fillibustering on a loop, if you get bored, maybe just ask unruffled if you can borrow the keys to the bias-confirmer-3000, toss my history in there, and talk in circles as much as you like.
you can be both of those things. just because you're struggling to engage with anything other than straw targets or articulate any clear principles doesn't mean i'm gish galloping.
you can reply with simply disengage and i won't respond.
I'm not struggling with anything. I disagree with your opinion, I've explained why, and you refuse to accept that it's possible to disagree for some reason.
Huh. I wonder why they do that. Let's see if Rimu likes socialists who are anti racist or his Zionist liberal friends more. I have a good feeling on the answer.
I would personally, but Rimu deleted my account from his instance. Because I called out his actions. Like a fascist burning books that say facts they don't like.
Cool story, bro.
Top responce from the Piefed people. "Nah, don't care about my server daddy"
"The PieFed people"
Lmaaooooooooo