Murse
Ye Power Trippin' BastardsThe power trip / ban doesn't bother me, but the misinformation does. They present as leftist, but flare up around US elections discouraging voter turnout via 'bOtH siDeS' garbage. that only ever elevates shit like MAGA.
In the linked thread, OP promotes rioting while discouraging voter turnout. My comments agreed with activism like riots, but pointed out that it's not an either-or thing. You can riot -and- vote; and even if you don't have it in you to riot, still do vote.
Banned.
You can see my removed comment quoted in the post after mine.
This 'blue MAGA' tankie shit is somehow worse than the loud-and-clear MAGA shit over on Reddit - at least those neonazis were honest about who they were.
Anywho, YSK. Spaces like r/conservative were clearly labeled and easy to avoid; LateStageCapitalism@lemmy.world presents as a cause worth rallying around, but only until you peel up the veneer and see that they're the same fucking thing.
Also please vote. In addition to whatever flavor of activism tickles your fancy.
Note to all: This is not the place to get on your "VOTE" soapboaxes. Stick to judging the moderation action.
And one of the main ways to judge posts is to VOTE them up or down. Hmmm.
Not in this comm. Check the sticky
Tankie outreach community with mods that are pro Russia and censorship heavy. One of them loves responding to comments they've deleted. LW does nothing like usual in response to problematic moderators. PTB.
They present as leftist, but flare up around US elections discouraging voter turnout via ‘bOtH siDeS’ garbage.
No, they criticize bourgeois elections all the time; consistently during all 24 months of the biennial US election cycle.
US liberals like you only complain about it for 2 months, and then go back to brunch for the next 22.
This ‘blue MAGA’ tankie shit is somehow worse than the loud-and-clear MAGA shit over on Reddit - at least those neonazis were honest about who they were.
‘Horseshoe theory’ is nonsense. We’re socialists, we’re punching right, and you & MAGA are to the right of us.
Don't hide who you really are - fascists supporting authoritarian and imperalist regimes.
They don't criticise Russian or Chinese elections even though there are definitely bourgeois. False!
Going straight to insults with the liberal crap and no, many people in the US care a great deal about elections for far more than just 2 months. This is false and inflammatory
Horseshoe theory perfectly describes leftist who cross over to worshipping neoauthotarian regimes like China and Russia. They embrace violence and turn their back on leftism and cross over to becoming something that is very similar to the far right only they profess socialism. The type of socialism where everyone is convinced by the barrel of a gun.
They like to accuse everyone as being fascist (legitimate) but then can't wrap their head around China being even more fascist than the US. It is a rather sad ideology really and I feel bad that they have lost the way.
China being even more fascist than the US.
Even by Reddit standards, that’s an impressive level of imperial core propaganda that you’ve integrated into your Western chauvinist core beliefs.
LATE STAGE CAPITALISM IS AN INVALID SUB RUN SOLELY BY AN ANTI-DEMOCRATIC CRYBABY MOD THAT BANS EVERYONE THAT DISAGREES WITH HIM AND HE IS MOST LIKELY A PAID FOREIGN SHILL.
Not sure how many times I have to keep pointing this out, but I will because fuck that loser.
Mod's name is GodlessCommie (lol) and he spreads anti-voter sentiment and runs the sub as his own personal cry space that you can only take part in if you support his narrative.
He is stupid, dangerous, and most likely being paid by people who want to see American decline.
Do not participate in that sub and let everyone you can know not to as well.
Where else? I can't stop seeing far right/russian propaganda. I don't even want to use this app anymore, it seems like that's all there is here, along with very mean aggressive manipulative accounts.
I don't know how to stop it. I can't even down vote the shit, or comment at all anymore because I think a mod silently banned me from multiple places or something.
I got banned for violating rule 4 (no "lessor evil rhetoric") despite specifically writing a comment not to include "lessor evil" rhetoric and then having the audacity to call out the mod to show where I broke rule 4 in my comment.
Fuck those guys. I was very motivated to report the channel, but I'm not 100% sure that I'm not just being a butthurt little bitch, gonna give it a few days to simmer, and to see if other people continue to have issues with their moderation. Still though, feels good to get a ban badge from them.
lessor evil
Lol. That moron mod doesn't even know how to spell "lesser".
Yeah, I thought about posting on here after that idiot banned me, but didn't feel like it was worth the effort. But at this point I've seen multiple others complaining about that fool and his sub so I'm glad they're taking the time to post about it.
If you care about a community, make another one, the way lemmy is setup you get just as much visibility as a popular one
You guys know you can do both?
I know you yanks aren't the smartest. But surely being able to do two things isn't that difficult for you?
I see OP has multiple comments that are all deleted. A reply quoting their "you should vote" comment isn't deleted. There are comments still up like:
What prevents you from voting and rioting at the same time?
There is absolutely no reason to not vote.
To me it looks like something else triggered the ban.
It could have been another one. I expanded on my stance that discouraging activism or voting is an act of support for the status quo, specifically MAGA. Maybe that crossed the mod's line. /shrug.
Idk I've seen multiple people with this sort of experience so I'm willing to believe OP
It's so that other people can still pile on. Telling people to vote is against LSC community rules.
Support for capitalism or for the parties or ideologies that uphold it are not welcome or tolerated.
It looks like they've got razor thin margins on what they allow.
-You should vote ✅️
-You should vote for the party that isn't measurably making you life worse. ❌️
They're guilty of "both sides bad" in my opinion. An endorsement of any mainstream party or candidate breaks their rules.
Saying you should vote would also be supporting capitalism or the parties/ideologies that uphold it.
Being banned from latestagecapitalism is an honor. They have conservative mods. You can be banned there for criticizing conservatism or saying things that are too far from Fox News talking points.
Not really sure how or why we end up with conservative mods in these communities, but it really ruins them.
LateStageCapitalism is run by a sole moderator who is either a foreign shill or so stupid that they're doing their work for them for free.
He bans anyone that goes against his narrative. I am by no means the only person that has spoken out against that sub and its mod. It's becoming public knowledge at this point that the sub is compromised.
They have communist mods, I think they're Marxists. I'd respect you more if you at least said you're against the "extreme left" or something like that instead of pretending that everyone who isn't liberal is conservative or secretly conservative.
.world, welcome to Tankie Lemmy
Yeah trolls who go into communities and directly and obviously violate the rules the community don't have any room to bitch and complain.
Yeah i blocked that community because they delete any comment that says anything about voting.
GodlessCommie, the sole active mod on that sub, literally spends all his time speaking out against voting or banning people that promote voting. He is either an asshole or a paid foreign shill, which are kind of the same thing.
To be clear, he bans people who promote voting as a concept. It isn't about people plugging a specific party. Just voting in general.
I find it weird how they remove comments of people with massive upvote ratios. Like arent those comments the community overwhelmingly agrees with? How are they justifying consistently censoring their community this way?
PTB just because of that
How are they justifying consistently censoring their community this way?
The sole active mod on LateStageCapitalism is an insufferable crybaby who is either an accelerationist or a paid foreign shill. If you go against his narrative, you will be banned. It's a trash sub that shouldn't be used by any reasonable person.
Things can be both popular and bad for a community and/or breaking its rules. It's obvious that this isn't what's happened here, but upvotes alone aren't everything - you could probably get a lot of upvotes with a good meme in any discussion community (because who checks what community a post came from every time before upvoting), or post an inflammatory political take that is bound to get a lot of comments that mods now have to deal with.
Here however, the Mod simply disagreed.
Yeah for sure, I see it similarly but just didnt want to write it all out. So thanks for your addition.
Yeah, but even so, these are just totalitarian and absurd rules. They're destroying freedom of speech because they're compelling the language and speech to only what they look as acceptable. That's certainly just minifascism.
fascism is when you stop fascist talking points from being spread
Wow. Your post is so reasonable, strongly in favour of rioting, correctly identifying it as better than voting, just allowing for voting. And still banned.
I've blocked a lot of PTB comms because of all the trolly libs calling anyone left of Schumer a tankie then whining about being banned from leftist spaces, but this is a bonkers ban. And from .world as well, not even a leftist instance. 🤷
To save folks a click:
Brace yourself for an apparently super edgy hot take:
Rioting > voting
rioting & voting > just rioting
just voting > nothing at all
Discouraging voting or rioting = supporting the status quo.
I can't disagree with that at all. I don't think any reasonable person could.
That's... that's it? What's ban worthy about that?
Discouraging voting or rioting = supporting the status quo.
To be silent in the face of oppression is to stand with the oppressor.
PTB. Everyone should be voting in this election. People like that boil all nuance down to two black and white naive takes:
- That you are either a voter OR you go out and protest. In reality there is nothing stopping you from doing both.
- That you should not vote because there is no unicorn candidate. In reality there will never be a perfect candidate.
I have voted in every election in the last 20 years, local, state, federal - and I have yet to see a candidate that I agree with completely. It will never happen. Expecting change tomorrow is a naive take. Slow incremental change is the only change I've seen on this planet. You are going to need to compromise on candidates, because it's always a bad and a worse candidate, and not voting means you are okay with the worse candidate. It's happening right now, and people are shocked pikachu of what happened in the last election. The reason is simple, people didn't vote.
Conservatives desperately want us to not go and vote. That should really tell you everything. Does it mean you have to agree with the candidate on everything? Absolutely not. Does it mean that your morals are the same as the person you voted for? Also absolutely not. Politics is usually voting against things you don't want than voting for things you do. People are strange complex creatures, and you'll never find a candidate who agrees with you. (Yes, even in multiple party scenarios).
If you choose not to decide you still have made a choice
Slow incremental change is the only change I’ve seen on this planet.
Only positive progressive change is slow and incremental. Regressives and authoritarians are able to pull off change pretty fast when they realize the system is too slow to stop them and won't punish them for wrecking everything.
That is why it is important to vote in every election to mitigate the damage they want to do.
Good correction. Legislating is slow, rolling back is fast.
(Relatedly; we're voting for the lesser of evils mostly because of the voting system we're using. RTV improves on this substantially, is used in several federal elections across the country, and has reasonable appeal in many places.)
I don't see any rule you broke so this is a pretty open and shut PTB for me.
That said, no great loss since these LSC communities are all millenarian fantasy dumpster fires. Capitalism ain't goin nowhere on its own.
the only leftists i've ever met that were serious people were the ones i've met in person. terminally online leftists just post through it and have nothing else. they post big endgame-level ideas, but if you ask them how they plan to get there, you get dogpiled and called a nazi. it's roleplaying for attention on social media.
Capitalism ain’t goin nowhere on its own.
Well, sure it is. It's going to fascism on its own.
(And I'd say, once you get into the full fascist stage, it's no longer strictly speaking 'capitalist' anymore. I'd define capitalism as 'rule by capital', but once fascism gets sufficiently entrenched, that's no longer really the case. At that point, power is no longer determined mainly by how much money you have, it becomes determined by your closeness and standing with the regime's leaders. Having lots of money often facilitates that, but it's no longer the primary driving factor -- the primary driving factor becomes ideological purity/loyalty and political pandering to the regime. And even those with lots of money can still easily fall out of favor with the regime for any ideological misstep, any perceived threat to or disagreement with the leader, and even those with large amounts of money can still be purged from the regime at a moment's notice. If it's possible for the regime's leader to suddenly decide he doesn't like you, so then the regime takes your capital away and gives it to someone more regime-friendly, that's not capitalism anymore.)
I personally doubt it will be replaced by fascism globally as it's simply too unstable an ideology, despite some current trends in that direction.
Well, no -- it will never be globally all at once, at least not in the current geopolitical landscape. It will happen to one country at a time. And then when that fascist country inevitably attacks its neighbors, fascism tries to spread that way.
Though I do wonder if, with the rise of globalism and powerful international corporations headed by fascist pricks, it might eventually end up being a more or less global phenomenon.
Yeah that's not a serious community. Like I can understand why an anarchist would be vehemently opposed to voting, but a socialist? No. PTB.
Edit: and furthermore, if they're so against voting, why haven't they disabled both downvotes AND upvotes, and only use just the other sort algorithms?
Most anarchist are quite supportive of voting, they would just rather have a direct democracy. The real issue for most is hierarchy. Ofcourse, that's not true for all anarchists.
Anarchist here: voting might be the least important, least effective action you take ... but as long as the state still holds power, you should still do it.
Edit: and furthermore, if they're so against voting, why haven't they disabled both downvotes AND upvotes, and only use just the other sort algorithms?
Anti-electoralists are not necessarily against voting in literally all circumstances. We're against voting for candidates for political office.
anarchist here. Absolutely against voting and especially against electoralism
Tell me, how would an anarchist self governed community make decisions as a group?
I'm talking about electoralist voting, not voting in general. Check out our instance governance rules
You're never going to get a reasonable answer from them if you get any answer at all. Anarchism only works until the difficult questions start getting asked. This is why there is no anarchist society on the planet other than some extremely small communities that would more reasonably be considered communes.
Exactly. Left-anarchist myself, and the only way is, surprise, voting. Voting and debating. Democracy, for god's sake. A leader doesn't necessarily means higher hierarchy; what it really means (or should mean) is just higher responsability with the capacity of fulfilling it.
The comment of yours they removed:
Who gives a fuck if it's actual democracy. Vote for whoever has the best shot of keeping the greater evil out of office, and use that time to sharpen your guillotine. Again, you don't need to pick just one.
The reason given:
Rule 4
Rule 4:
No imperialism, conservatism, reactionism or Zionism, lessor evil rhetoric. Dismissing 3rd party votes or ‘wasted votes on 3rd party’ is lessor evil rhetoric.
Instance-wide rule 4:
Do not post illegal content of any type. Do not engage in any activity that may encourage, facilitate or provide access to illegal transactions. Do not share or encourage the sharing of abusive or sexually suggestive content involving real or fictional minors. This also includes drawn, animated, generated and other content that does not depict real minors. Any violent or otherwise inappropriate behavior involving a minor will also always be strictly prohibited.
Based on what you said, compared to community rule 4 as well as instance rule 4, this is a PTB
Reported the mod team to the LW admins for review.
GodlessCommie, the sole active mod of LateStageCapitalism has set the rules up in such a way to give himself carte blanche to remove anyone that goes against his narrative.
He is quite possibly the most insufferable mod in the entire Lemmiverse and has made that sub his own private cry space and destroyed the sub's credibility.
"Keeping the greater evil out of office" is 100% "lessor evil rhetoric"
context on lessor evil rhetoric:
Dismissing 3rd party votes or ‘wasted votes on 3rd party’ is lessor evil rhetoric.
They defined what they consider it. By their definition, this doesn't apply.
What they said is "Dismissing 3rd party votes or ‘wasted votes on 3rd party’ is lessor evil rhetoric." So now we know that "Dismissing 3rd party votes or ‘wasted votes on 3rd party’" is "lesser evil rhetoric", but that doesn't mean that other things cannot be lesser evil rhetoric, e.g....the exact quoted comment.
Maybe they took the "who cares" as imperialist 🫠
oof
Rule 0
I have yet to see the posts punching left lately AND not following the comm rules be removed (note reflection on op not above image)
Blue isn’t left?
A lot of them are outright conservative.
The dems mission is to prevent moving left. Hopefully that will change but in any other country they'd be center right (like in the UK that has a liberal dems party)
No, the democractic party is overwhelmingly not "left." They are the controlled opposition, in a game that the republicans are no longer playing, they are playing overthrow the republic, while the democrats are still playing oligarch monopoly.
I... don't think this user is punching left...
OP certainly is https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/28745948
Agreed, but I was referring to the person your comment directly replied to.
And I was agreeing that there's been a flood of the same rule breaking posts all just punching left
Fascism emerges from liberalism. Calling people fascists when they are against Liberalism and for communism is exactly the sort of shit that will get you wrecked in communities run by leftists.
Fascism emerges from liberalism.
Lol. Didn't even need to check that you were from .ml to know you were from .ml.
Sometimes it feels like you're all just the same person posting under different accounts because you all sound the same.
Implying liberalism and fascism are related continues to be one of the dumbest sentiments I've ever seen on the internet. Ever. And I've been on this shit since Geocities was the only thing worth doing on it.
I mean, then maybe look for the scholarship on it without using the Internet. Don't know what to tell you bub.
Keep the comments in YPTB posts about the moderation action itself, not about the general topic in which the moderation took place.
Also, removing their comment wasn't just opposing liberalism. They advocated for voting and rioting, which certainly isn't a part of liberalism. At that point, it is just anti-democratic.
PTB
Vote for whoever has the best shot of keeping the greater evil out of office
It's "Lesser evil" liberalism. The greater evil is the United States of America, not half of its ruling party.
I was going to make a post and argue about your comment but then see you are on a .ml, so I will just leave it at this
Fascism emerges from liberalism.
probably the stupidest fucking thing I have read today
Yup.
.ml loves stating liberalism and fascism are related. And they state it with the assurance of an accomplished scholar.
It remains one of the dumbest opinions I've ever read on the internet.
Wait untill you hear how accomplished scholars sound when they talk about reality! It's so wild to hear how confident and consistent they are!
You don't read your own comments?
Low effort.
Think of the 2 nations that define fascism in the modern mind: Germany and Italy. What were they before they were fascist? They were liberal.
I know this is difficult, because it requires unlearning a whole bunch of stuff and learning what feels like old history, but stick with me.
America is a Liberal country. The conservatives and the liberals in America are two factions of Liberalism. Every "tri-color" flag in Europe is the result of a Liberal revolution. Liberalism is really the first formal political philosophy that became a state system. Prior to Liberalism there were monarchies, but not because of a formal political philosophy. Monarchies emerged without that level of self-consciousness. But after Liberalism emerged, Conservatism emerged as a political philosophy to defend the monarchic state system.
Liberalism was a political philosophy developed by the merchant class in European monarchies. Before ocean-faring colonialism, merchants made money via overland trade routes and benefited from the European Crusades. But they couldn't convert their riches into real political power due to the way monarchies worked and in particular the absence of private property.
But when Europe developed the ability to do over-water colonialism, the merchant class got huge and much much richer. And that created pressure against the monarchic system. Merchants wanted to be able to buy and sell land, they wanted to buy and sell entire cities. They wanted their wealth to translate to political power.
And they couched that desire in terms of "freedom", "liberty", and "the pursuit of happiness". The crown should not stop a man (and only men, and only European men) from going off in boats to take the wealth of other societies and get rich from it. They certainly shouldn't stop bankers from funding such adventures and then claiming the right to buy millions of acres and pay workers a subsistence wage to farm it for the banker's profit.
This was the birth of Liberalism. And wherever Liberalism overthrow the monarchy, they destroyed the existing social contract (nobilesse oblige) and replaced it with "every man can earn a wage in a free society". Which resulted in about 100 - 150 years of abject poverty, famine, pestilence, slums, wars, and eventually labor movements.
Labor movements emerged as workers realized that a) the politicians and businessmen were all lying about liberty for all and b) they had to band together because the "democracies" were sending in the military and paramilitary forces to crush them whenever they decided to stop working and demand better conditions.
This went on for a while until one group of workers got organized in a different way and overthrew their government entirely. 1917, the Bolsheviks, the October Revolution. And what happened? The Liberals got super scared. They saw that it meant they could lose the battle with their own working class. So the first thing they did was invade Russia and try to stop the revolution.
But the second thing they did was fund the rise of the Third Reich and the Italian fascist movement. These movements protected markets, protected large private property holders, and promised to solve the problems Liberals were facing by 1) fusing the labor movement with a nationalist movement to prevent revolution, 2) fuse the state and labor with industrial investments to build the most productive state in the world and 3) use that fusion to field the most powerful military in the world and direct it at the Soviet workers state, destroy the revolution, and build an American-style occupation of the Slavic people's that would subjugate them for a hundred years or more, just like the Europeans did everywhere else around the world.
And the Americans, and the English, all Liberals, all businessmen with private property and individual rights to the pursuit of happiness through profits, they all funded the fascists because they saw it as a solution to the problem of labor organizing. They believed so much that the Nazis would win that they watched the Great Depression create mass unrest and when FDR's faction decided to concede some social democratic reforms to avoid revolution, the liberal businessmen of America plotted to coup him and replace him with a military man and implement European-style fascism in the USA because it was a defense against the working class.
Liberalism produces fascism. That's where it comes from. That's its systemic function. That's its history.
Not agreeing or disagreeing, because I don't really want in this discussion, I was just passing by and saw what could be a miscommunication. What I think they were trying to say is the logical inversion of what they actually said, which would be: [Fascism has an extremely hard time rising under authoritarianism]
What they said, "fascism emerges from liberalism" reads as "fascism ALWAYS emerges from liberalism" which I feel like is... Really loose speaking, I think. I could be wrong.
Maybe any non-authoritarian control does ALWAYS result in fascism. You would have to do the statistics on all history and human behavior. It's definitely possible to be true. I think there may be, I recall something about plato or socrares or ancient Greece or something talking about how a tyrant will ALWAYS rear its head or something.
[Fascism has an extremely hard time rising under authoritarianism]
Maybe any non-authoritarian control does ALWAYS result in fascism.
You're misunderstanding the terminology. Liberalism, as it's being used here, is synonymous with capitalism. It's not the opposite of authoritarianism.
In the historical examples of Germany and Italy, fascism came about out of a capitalist system and supported and was supported by the capitalist class. The economic policies of fascism involved nationalizing businesses belonging to the out groups, but was primarily focused on privatization, including the aforementioned businesses, in order to redistribute them to the in group. The reason that the capitalists supported fascists was because the systems they were in had become unstable and unsustainable, and they knew that their interests would be threatened if socialists came to power, but not if fascists did.
That's not to say that every capitalist system always leads to fascism, but rather that every fascist state has come out of capitalism. Of course, people have different definitions for fascism, and the degree that that's true depends on how you define it. A narrow definition that treats a capitalist class as a defining characteristic of fascism would make it true by definition.
Thank you. That's a very clear explanation.
deserved it
Lol. Somehow I knew you'd pop up in this thread with that opinion. You are predictable.
liberals will see someone having principles and call them 'predictable'
sorry babe, some of us have politics that aren't pure opportunism and triangulation.
It's .world. it's just an extension of fascist reddit. Any other instance will offer different types of disappointment.
I've learned that a lot of "leftists" either are well aware they are acting against the things they claim to support or are far less intelligent than they would have you believe.
Anarchists are gonna shred you for the electoralism here.
Anarchist here. No I'm not.
i second that
Most are against voting.
Bullshit. The vast majority of anarchists do vote, because we aren't idiots who need to be told to vote.
Why are you using sharp language? You have removed vote comments before.
Also, sorry for being short-tempered. I'm taking a break from modding this comm until after the midterms, since I find it very frustrating atm.
...um.... whoops. I definitely feel responsible for adding fuel to that fire. What a shit time to be a mod.
Kinda feel like I owe you a beer.
It's all good, it wasn't this post in isolation. And sometimes disengaging from the fray and touching grass is the lesser evil :p
This community is self harm. I dunno why I unblocked it.
At least it's not transphobic malding anymore.
Needs some custom css that encrusts the edges of page elements with salt from liberal tears.
Yes but only if they are off topic, or belittling others for daring to criticize the dems, or falsely claiming anarchists don't vote. Sure, I'm sure there's a few who don't and that's their prerogative. Anyway I'll leave you to it.
Thank you for your perspective, let’s both disengage, have a good night.
being against electoralism is not necessarily being against voting (as long as you emphasize its extremely limited utility). admin unruffled last week proposed banning calling to vote* and was flamed to the point where they deleted their post
* it’s slightly more nuanced but the examples made enforcement look like that. i’ll need to head to my computer to explain. i’ll start with that it was more “you can’t say ‘not voting is a vote for Trump’”
::: spoiler Hey I noticed you used wrong pronouns for unruffled there
admin unruffled last week proposed banning calling to vote* and was flamed to the point where ~~he~~ deleted ~~his~~ post :::
oh shoot sorry
Yeah because I knew it would one of these posts after another until election day. I give up. I'm not moderating these.
unruffled last week proposed banning calling to vote*
Haha I wish that was surprising. What a tool.
Coming from you that means nothing, you’re one of the biggest tools on Lemmy.
Tbh I'm more pissed at OP's implication that anti-electoralists are neo-Nazis. Like I see a hundred bellyaching posts a day about voting Blue and I keep my mouth shut for most of them because I have stuff to do and more productive stuff to talk about, but goddamn this one really fucked with me, and I thought Murse was at least cool enough to know better.
Who gives a fuck if it's actual democracy. Vote for whoever has the best shot of keeping the greater evil out of office, and use that time to sharpen your guillotine. Again, you don't need to pick just one.
Well you definitely broke rule 4:
4 No imperialism, conservatism, reactionism or Zionism, lessor (sic) evil rhetoric. Dismissing 3rd party votes or ‘wasted votes on 3rd party’ is lessor evil rhetoric.
YDI for being an annoying , although maybe a permanent ban is a bit harsh.
::: spoiler "off-topic" about electoralism
They present as leftist, but flare up around US elections discouraging voter turnout via 'bOtH siDeS' garbage.
I'm sorry but what are you on about? Leftists are rightly "flaring up" in response to "Vote Blue"-types like you actually shitting up our spaces. You're trying to guilt us into accommodating your individual incoherent liberal sensitivities. Well I'm done moderating my politics to be legible to liberals. If you really cannot stop yourself from going to the polls then at least shut up about them in revolutionary spaces.
And I'm coming at you as an anarchist, not a ML. We should be building dual power in direct opposition to the State and capitalism, not dancing in their fucking circuses! When you step into a revolutionary space and whine about voting, you suck out oxygen to discuss the thing we're actually...here...to discuss!
You wanna go to the polls? Do it in shame and silence.
This 'blue MAGA' tankie shit is somehow worse than the loud-and-clear MAGA shit over on Reddit - at least those neonazis were honest about who they were.
Ayyy that's a wild accusation coming from the person voting for one of the pro-genocide parties.
Also please vote. In addition to whatever flavor of activism tickles your fancy.
I would sooner saw my own head off. Death to . :::
for being an annoying lib
Welp. There went all your credibility.
It's great that your profile picture is a clown because now I don't even have to call you one
Creative.
Anyways. Would you like to understand how credibility works so you don't keep hurting yourself in your confusion?
When you use a derogatory term against someone you are arguing with, others can see that you have no valid argument and have resorted to name calling to score some kind of imaginary points.
For example, other than MAGAts, who deserve all the derision aimed their way, I haven't created some kind of derogatory term for adherents to the other ideologies I don't agree with. I don't agree with Libertarianism or Anarchism, but I haven't created some dumbass term to try to belittle them.
Unfortunately, for someone of your limited intellect, it seems that doing exactly that is the only ammo you've got in your tiny little weapon.
Edit: Ah, it appears you are a self-professed anti-voter. Now I don't feel so bad implying that you aren't very intelligent.
When you use a derogatory term against someone you are arguing with, others can see that you have no valid argument and have resorted to name calling to score some kind of imaginary points.
Unfortunately, for someone of your limited intellect
a lot of complaining about calling people liberal as a derogatory term but then practically every comment of yours is you being derogatory about peoples intelligence for disagreeing
others can see that you have no valid argument and have resorted to name calling to score some kind of imaginary points.
Setting aside your incoherent off-topic tirade, I really don't see how this would violate that rule. Advocating for voting in general is not inherently lesser evil rhetoric, nor did they say anything against third parties. So this seems pretty clearly not a violation of that rule.
Vote for whoever has the best shot of keeping the greater evil out of office
I fail to see how that's not lesser-evil rhetoric.
incoherent off-topic tirade
It's actually not incoherent; it's a consistent if emphatic application of anti-electoralist anarchist analysis. You just don't like what I have to say or how I say it.
I spoilered the stuff that doesn't strictly have to do with the moderation action to declutter the feed, but I stand by what I said and how I said it.
And I usually try not to be this venomous towards electoralists, and I won't be that venomous towards you...but this user called us (anti-electoralists) neo-nazis. That's a very serious accusation which I will not take lying down!
Did I miss a comment? The one I looked at did not say that. It just said voting is a good idea. I also did not see where they called anti-electoralists neo-Nazis. If that's the reason they got banned it would make more sense.
But I was mainly sniping your tirade because we're not supposed to be arguing with the comment here, we're supposed to be discussing the rules and whether OP deserved to be banned. Whether we agree with them isn't super relevant--although I guess it can be if we want to discuss whether given rules have merit or not, so maybe there is some gray area.
Vote for whoever has the best shot of keeping the greater evil out of office
I fail to see how that’s not lesser-evil rhetoric.
That's because you're assuming the lesser evil is always the one in second place. If you don't think any 3rds have the potential to break into that coveted political standing between the red and blue teams, that's on you.
My posts only expressed hostility to MAGA, which summoned defensive tankies like a swarm of flies closing in on a freshly dropped turd. The longer I'm on this website, the more I'm noticing that behavior. It's gotten to the point that I'm questioning if "tankies" are even a thing, or if that's just a shitty attempt to conceal their red caps and klan robes under a poorly executed online persona for 'lols'.
I digress - my suspicion of tankies is off topic, outside of their overt and consistent support for MAGA and ilk, which I did call out in the previous thread.
My posts only expressed hostility to MAGA, which summoned defensive tankies like a swarm of flies closing in on a freshly dropped turd.
I mean, what you said here was:
This 'blue MAGA' tankie shit is somehow worse than the loud-and-clear MAGA shit over on Reddit
Like it's not only campists who use the terminology "blue MAGA". Anarchists and other non-campist revolutionaries rightly use the terminology (although I would personally not label someone reluctantly going to the polls as "Blue MAGA"; I would use that term for someone more emphatic and supportive of the policies that liberal politicians are responsible for). Followed by
- at least those neonazis were honest about who they were.
Like can you see where I'm coming from here? If you really didn't mean to call all anti-electoralists neo-nazis then... okay I guess, but that's not how I read it.
Tbh, that's really what motivated me to speak up. Like I'm willing to agree to disagree with my comrades about whether or not they individually show up to the polls, even though my viewpoint is emphatically against electoralism as praxis, but I (and I think some other people) read your post as if you were comparing your anti-electoralist comrades to neo-nazis.
It's gotten to the point that I'm questioning if "tankies" are even a thing, or if that's just a shitty attempt to conceal their red caps and klan robes under a poorly executed online persona for 'lols'.
I mean, from an anarchist perspective ... it's not at all shocking that people have recognized that some hierarchies are unacceptable while not (yet?) realizing that the State is inherently one such hierarchy, which is itself responsible for maintaining those other hierarchies. For a different example, many liberals clearly recognize that racism and sexism and homophobia are unjustifiable hierarchies, to the point that some are even doing very noble work in stopping ICE...but they still have not figured out the underlying pattern (hierarchical social relations).
The campists you're running into here are probably not Trump supporters. It's just that..."America bad" is a correct answer 99% of the time, and 99% is good enough for some people to round it up to 100%. (And even in the 0.1% where it's not the correct answer...it is true because America is bad, it's just not a helpful answer.) IMO campism is a cognitive distortion, but it's understandable where it comes from.
I usually try not to be this venomous
Hahahahahah hahahahahaha ok
Yeah, not venemous to leftists who are electoralists. I've already clocked you as a liberal snake 🐍
I "clocked" you as having nothing but venom unless someone agrees with you. Then I read your screed against voting and I knew what you are. Snake doesn't cover it.
Well your clock is busted. I've had loads of polite disagreements with people on Lemmy. Although tbh I am a bit more contentious on the .world subs you frequent because, well, .world is a liberal shit hole and it is incredibly cathartic to yell at liberals.
I find it cathartic to tell fake leftists that I see through their lies, but I rarely do it until some moron writes a long tirade against the concept of voting because they're actually a magat.
although maybe a permanent ban is a bit harsh.
i was gonna agree with that, but then i got to the part of their post where they say that everyone pushing back on blue maga are neonazis
A shocking comment from someone who uses the word liberal to insult anyone who even slightly disagrees with them.
Well maybe if you weren't being a liberal I wouldn't have to call you a liberal 😑
Yep it's just me and definitely not anyone who challenges you.
It's you and other shitlibs with whom I am unapologetically contentious.
shitlibs
It's like you're a masochist who gets off destroying their credibility in an argument.
Why exactly does the word "shitlib" invalidate my credibility? I made my opposition to liberal capitalism explicit at every step of my output on the Fediverse.
You must not be very smart if you can't tell the difference between disagreeing with something and destroying your own credibility by using derogatory terms in regards to it.
Get yourself back in school. It'll do wonders for you.
Use of that word kinda gives you away, fraud.
The word "shitlibs"? What are you smoking and can I have some?
I don't smoke meth, sorry.
