cross-posted from: https://lemmygrad.ml/post/2139382
It seems most cross tendency engagement devolves in to fights between leftcoms/anarchists vs AES supporters or “Dengists” vs Maoists. Anyone can point at each other and say “they started it” and avoid responsibilities. We agree on 90% of stuff but Anarchists decide to randomly call us tankies and we feel the need to defend ourselves or else look like we lost without an argument. Likewise we make memes about Anarkiddies and write texts denouncing them and they feel the same. Among scientific socialists we see China as an ally and an example to learn from while Maoists want to call out “revisionism.” There seems to be a contradiction between the history of different socialist experiments and disagreements not really mattering to our own conditions and those experiments also being vital learning experiences for us.
It’s strange to think about how we pretty much agree with Patsocs on more than almost any other tendency yet they are almost useless because they don’t understand the basic dialectical method and why have our positions beyond aesthetics and thus cannot understand the basic material conditions of this country.
We can keep trying to bring more people into our own sects and hope they do work for our own type of socialism irl, but if we’re so divided how can this happen. Of course we should all just log off and do things irl, but then some will fall into the trap of either larping or just helping their own friends without the wider goal of revolution.
We all need to remember that the feds let us speak because we spend all our time bickering. How can we unify as a revolutionary left? There are projects irl for trying to find unity as scientific socialists like ChunkaLuta, but it would be nice to be able to do the same online. In a way I’m just wishing everyone could just listen to revleft and everything could work out, but what can Lemmygrad and hexbear do for this vision?
You could start by not banning people for having takes you think are slightly bad or whatever.
I get where you’re coming from, but that would be predicated on the idea that the user with the bad take would be willing to learn and admit fault. I see roughly a 1out of 5 success rate with that here.
Hard to admit anything when you get banned in the middle of a conversation.
Banned @Serdan@lemm.ee from the community genzedong@lemmygrad.ml reason: repeatedly describing the “Holodomor” as a man-made famine
Spouting nazi propaganda is going to get you banned from a left space
This is the part where you get asked for examples and provide absolutely none.
Like, what do you expect a socialist space to do in order to keep it socialist? Allow it to be overrun by liberals and fascists? Lmao. How do you think liberal spaces remain liberal?
I was in the middle of a conversation about pros and cons of Wikipedia when I got banned on genzedong.
Liar
Banned @Serdan@lemm.ee from the community genzedong@lemmygrad.ml reason: repeatedly describing the “Holodomor” as a man-made famine
Where “repeatedly” means that it was one of the things we were discussing.
🤡
Nice self portrait
Saying you’re a socialist while supporting NATO is peak 🤡
Blatantly bad faith.
I’ve been seeing posters for a local revsoc group, so I guess I really should just do that and disengage from all this terminally online nonsense.
Have fun accomplishing nothing
Death to natopedia.
🙄
CIA are literally the biggest editors on the site. The only people that eyeroll this are the western chauvinists and white supremacists that support their actions to revise history and paint a very specific narrative on every single topic to the benefit of american interests. Go fuck yourself, your ban was well deserved.
I’m dying to hear your explanation of what this means in practice
In practice it means the US imperialist narrative is rampant on every single page, and that the byzantine rules system of wikipedia they have helped build advantages full time employed people from their organisation because the average person simply does not have the time to understand how to navigate it. It means real journalists get labelled untrustworthy while fake mainstream media “”“journalists”“” better described as propagandists or influencers get trusted on everything no matter how many times they’re proven incorrect. It means pages like Azov’s get rewritten piece by piece to remove references to their nazism. It means pages about war crimes the cia dislikes get deleted, etc etc.
What the fuck do you think it means? That a bunch of people whose principle jobs are disinformation, destroying democracies, doing assassinations against leftists, funnelling money to fascists and performing torture have the interests of the world at heart? Fucking idiot. They have the interests of the american state and american SUPREMACY at heart, which represents white supremacy on the global stage. Your support and defence of them represents your supremacist brainworms
.
I disagree with you on the facts, but not even to such a degree that we couldn’t have a reasonable conversation about it. It’s mostly about the extent to which any organization can control the narrative on Wikipedia.
But see, what happens is that you immediately construct a narrative where I am actively in support US imperialism, and thus not someone who can be reasoned with. It’s a thought terminating cliche that ensures your little bubble stays insular.
Pathetic.
Btw,
Ridiculous exaggeration. Vast majority of pages are not remotely political. But I’m sure the article on complex numbers is just chock full of propaganda. 🤓
It’s really not that complicated and there’s thorough documentation on how everything works, so it’s hardly obscure either. You’re just rationalizing your own intellectual laziness.
Oh, wait. I know this one. Die lügenpresse, ja?
Literally the first paragraph after the intro has the word nazi three times.
Like how the article on Hunka got deleted? Ah, right. It didn’t. CIA voted to keep it by overwhelming majority.
I think it means you don’t have a clue how anything works because you’re an intellectually lazy, chronically incurious child.
I do not have a problem with any part of that. It’s like with that other child who thought he was “dunking” on me. I skimmed his profile and we agree on basically everything, but if the slightest hint of a challenge to the orthodoxy is detected you just go into full meltdown.
Either defending or supporting the US empire would be pretty weird, given that I’m a lifelong socialist. Also not American. Unlike you, I’m guessing. The other child is aggressively American, and you seem pretty similar. It’s that inherent sense of supremacy you share.
Depends on the take. At some point, there’s gotta be some thing, some goal, some idea that you don’t compromise on.
I was in the middle of a conversation about pros and cons of Wikipedia when I got banned on genzedong.
Apparently the thing they don’t compromise on is Wikipedia being a CIA front.
Banned @Serdan@lemm.ee from the community genzedong@lemmygrad.ml reason: repeatedly describing the “Holodomor” as a man-made famine
You were spouting nazi propaganda so fuck off
I would also have described the Irish famine as man-made, but part of the conversation was about whether the term makes sense at all.
I thought the Nazi line was that it was genocide?
I only said the Holodomor was man made
In the context of an encyclopedia the points that matter are:
Both were part of the conversation.
Btw, I’ve been a socialist my entire life. Immediately alienating people for not having fully formed perfect opinions on every subject is some real echochamber bs.
You support Wikipedia and NATO
Sure, you’re the one true leftist
Touch grass, weirdo.
Curious, do you have any examples?
They were spouting nazi propaganda about the Holodomor
For the record, that’s a lie.
I was in the middle of a conversation about pros and cons of Wikipedia when I got banned on genzedong.