this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2023
364 points (99.5% liked)

chapotraphouse

13473 readers
1 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank

Dunk posts in general go in the_dunk_tank, not here

Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from the_dunk_tank

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Too obvious to be funny, but i still wanted to draw a shitpost.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Doug@midwest.social 8 points 2 years ago (146 children)

Yep. They lie about themselves and they're opponents. Just like their opponents do in an opposing direction. They lie to make the opponents look worse and themselves look better.

Just like you've done here.

Exaggeration of "enemy" faults while downplaying your own.

[–] AcidSmiley@hexbear.net 51 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (55 children)

It's hardly an exaggeration of enemy faults when the enemies self-identify as fascists or are a bunch of transphobes who can't even handle the existence of pronoun tags. And yes, transphobes and fascists are my enemies, these people literally want to kill me or want to deny my right to exist as myself in public and live a dignified life. I won't have that here, or anywhere we can extend our influence. As somebody else said, go to the bottom of the page and check our modlog. We're open and transparent about our moderation policy, everybody can see which mod actions were taken and why. For context, we normally have a person like that show up every other day at most, now we have to purge bigots all the time. Maybe your standards are too low to get this, maybe you think "nonbinary people don't exist" or "stop using pronouns" isn't hate speech, but it is. These are reactionary talking points and idgaf if you're fine with such people infiltrating your instance, we will keep our community safe from harm as we've done before when such issues came up. Being an inclusive, safer space takes active work and it includes stepping on people's toes and kicking people out who can't behave.

[–] Doug@midwest.social 4 points 2 years ago (54 children)

Nope, I'm with you on all that. That's also not what the comic is highlighting. Trans people exist and deserve all the rights everyone else has. Transphobes are pieces of shit and should be dealt with accordingly.

"I think Western institutions and media are not being entirely honest about their geopolitical opinions" is not like the phrasing I see from hexbear users out in the wild.

[–] ShareThatBread@hexbear.net 15 points 2 years ago (1 children)
[–] Doug@midwest.social 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

They're words, ShareThatBread. Do you understand how both foster thoughts?

[–] FunkyStuff@hexbear.net 5 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This style of comic always does this, though, it reduces the arguments down to the basics to demonstrate why the other side is wrong. I've definitely seen many a Hexbear user get called a bot for implying that NATO countries are being dishonest about their geopolitical opponents, that's all the comic is trying to say really.

[–] Doug@midwest.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't doubt it. It seems like a large swath of the Internet has a hard time understanding that their own thoughts and experiences aren't universal.

I'll absolutely agree that NATO countries are dishonest about their geopolitical opponents. I would also say those opponents are dishonest about NATO countries. I don't think that's at all far fetched. It bothers me that it seems to come off controversial around here.

[–] FunkyStuff@hexbear.net 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Well, yeah, but as westerners we can't do anything about how Russian or Chinese people react to their governments' messaging, we can only make sure to defeat imperialist narratives in our own spheres. Sometimes downplaying the negative aspects about other countries, especially the negative aspects that our own nations use for propaganda, is a good rhetorical tactic to keep the focus on what we can do to make positive change happen and not fall for the narratives that are directed at us.

[–] Doug@midwest.social 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I don't agree but I can respect your position.

What about when we get first hand accounts from trusted sources in regards to the state of life in those countries. Would you ignore them to continue keeping focus or acknowledge them?

[–] FunkyStuff@hexbear.net 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Well, how can acknowledging them help foster an internationalist working class? If there's a way to promote solidarity based on first hand accounts, sure why not, but if there isn't it's neither here nor there.

For example let's say we get some accounts from China. If the people of China are prospering, I can agitate and say that a better world is possible, just look at China, and at the same time it's a good argument against intervening in China. If things are bad in China, depending on the reasons, I could either analyze how their policies could have been different and save that criticism for when it's time to build a new socialist experiment, so we can learn from the mistakes of history. If the reasons stem from Western economic policies, then I can agitate by saying that our outdated system is harming millions of people. What I would never do, is shout from the rooftops that life in China is horrible, or worse than here, because that drives down morale and it makes people more likely to be complacent and fall for false consciousness or end-of-historyism. The main point is, as socialists, we should agree on supporting no war but the class war, and as proles we should be agitating, educating, and organizing; we should not be imperialist lap dogs and do the State Department's job for them.

Maybe the source of the disagreement here is that you could see discourse and political discussion as an endeavor that should be illuminating and pursue truth. I think there's value to that, but not in discourse, I save the truth seeking for when I read calmly and have the time to look for definitions/relevant historical facts. To me, the point of public discourse and political discussion is to exert class power and advance the position of the working class, heighten the contradictions when reasonable, and in even the smallest way to set the stage for a progressive change toward the next stage of history i.e. revolution. That can also involve dispelling some of the fictions of capitalist ideology, it can involve rhetoric, appealing to people's material situation, etc.

[–] Doug@midwest.social 2 points 2 years ago

I can agree with your assessment. I absolutely understand the value of, shall we call it directed truth?

Maybe some of it is hope that people will be willing and able to see and accept the whole truth of a situation. Some things are better for group a and some for group b. If we work together we can find the best of both.

I suspect you don't have that same hope. I could absolutely understand that and maybe even consider you the better off of the two of us for that specific circumstance.

load more comments (52 replies)
load more comments (52 replies)
load more comments (142 replies)