Free speech enthusiast.

Long term lemmy dot world user, left after their anti communism and created accounts at lemmygrad as well as dot ee

Lemmy world admins are doing a disservice with creating a firewall for hundred thousand users to the idea of and work done by the lemmy developers.

  • 0 Posts
  • 25 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: August 2nd, 2023

help-circle
rss






  • You know I’ve been here the whole time, you could leverage the same critique in 1998 and yet wouldn’t have gotten a proper voting reform. The point is for that you need a lot of power and that power you don’t get currently.

    Your idea is: Lets create the system so that we get more power, to do that we need enough power to change the system. You see how that is a reverse order?

    If that isn’t the way forward as strategic goal (since it was tried for decades and there was no success in changing it), what specific goals can you personally do to create power? Power that can benefit your community and possibly the world (just so that no nationalistic takes are posed as solutions).




  • Just want to mention a couple things. I work with a group that ensures that people who are trans or gay get asylum in Germany and also get reasonable safe transit. Of course I could do more, but we even brought a trans person from the US who effectively fled what you describe to the right resources so that they could get asylum here (and also into contact with the doctors so that HRT prescriptions don’t have gaps). I am involved in what is now majorly labeled queer politics since the early 90s when the FRG was a place often more restrictive than the GDR in terms of law.

    I do regularly read and sometimes post on Hexbear, I read up your comments (which account for quite a bit of your posting history with this account there) and can understand some of the aspects you mention, but don’t get why you conflate the personal slights against you with an assigned bad position for them. The latter includes words like “hexchan”.

    You do believe that there are some factions in some states of the USA in which the democratic party acts well and secures some of your rights, this is what you hope to strengthen when you defend the democratic party. Plenty users have not as much faith as you do (often people who do have quite a political history themselves, too) including a not small variety of trans users who answered you. Even some in the US and some of them disagree with your outlook. That is a difference of politics and a difference of mental models.

    But they don’t actually care about my rights, happiness, or safety, or those of any other trans people.

    Is disingenuous at best and more reasonable slander. I get that you want to be safe - and hexbear users want that, too, for others, for themselves and for you. However they have a wide range of life stories, users from places the US bombed are posting regularly. They were bombed under Obama too, with harsh police procedures and reduction of rights for LGTBQ folk. Some want a USA that isn’t as easy at the trigger of military “intervention”. Being able to experience multiple points of view is part of a global society and internationalism which is in my eyes the only way for us non cis-endo hetero people to survive long term. Shunning a community of up to 20k users cause you have political differences and slandering them is something you can do, but it will count for what liberal privileged trans users do.



  • For questions like that pretty much no newspaper is trustworthy.

    However you made a claim that is a known propaganda lie, I gave you sources, yet you do not say: “I was wrong, I will delete that sentence from my post and make a disclaimer to it!”, no you try to defend your lie.

    You say “while it wasn’t specifically true, you could imagine that over 70 years in some countries of 1.2 billion it might’ve be true somewhere!”

    Again, family of mine was prosecuted in the liberal western FRG for homosexuality and sent to prison. 30 years earlier they would’ve ended up in death camps.






  • He is right though. It isn’t a fallacy, the usage of the word tankie is so far removed from content that it is a bad term and more thought terminating than anything.

    Tankies were originally a small subset of some Western and some, mostly East European, socialists and communists which were in favour of a (para-)military response to the revolt in Hungary in 1956. It was a complex situation and even people not on the side of Nagy within Hungary were in favour of the Soviet action.

    The term now was used, and amplified by intelligence agencies and Western media, to decry the Soviet action and more importantly de-legitimize several communist groups. In that sense the functional usage of the term is similar, but the question is where would the slur hit actually?

    In principle it would hit a small sub section of MLs who followed Khrushchev’s decision. Many people within the pact did see the de-Stalinisation and how it was communicated as problematic, as it enabled opposition forces to claim ground in countries. Nagy tried to do introduce reforms, the most far reaching: “Hungary to leave the Warsaw Pact and declare neutrality in the Cold War.”

    Countries thinking about leaving the dominant two powers spheres of influence during the Cold War were often met with violence. See the Jakarta Method for more information about that (i.e. Vietnam, Korea, Indonesia, the whole of South America). During that time colonialism was also still relevant and colonial powers did use excessive violence, this is another part of the book.

    Now what you and others do is labeling people who are to the left of the Soviets at that point as Tankies. Which is doubly wrong and cynical. What is interesting is that the slur can be traced back for the last 6 years to the US and there to more right wing places. It wasn’t primarily a phrase that was used by leftists. However after the heating chamber of the alt right online people used it to label even people who are democratic socialists at best.

    In that sense it is a continuity to the Red Scare, to not have to engage with content.

    Luckily the US would never in the 1950s use regime change in countries, for example it would never use military force in Guatemala to ensure the profits of the United Fruit company and the CIA director’s family or

    alike
    1948–1960s Italy
    1949 Syrian coup d'état
    1949–1953 Albania
    1953 Iranian coup d'état
    1954 Guatemalan coup d'état
    1956–57 Syria crisis
    1957–58 Indonesian rebellion
    1959–2000 assassination attempts on Fidel Castro
    1959 Cambodia, Bangkok Plot
    1960 Congo coup d'état
    1961 Cuba, Bay of Pigs Invasion
    1961 Cuba, Operation Mongoose
    1961 Dominican Republic
    1963 South Vietnamese coup d'état
    1964 Brazilian coup d'état
    1965–66 Indonesia, Transition to the New Order
    1966 Ghanaian coup d'état
    1971 Bolivian coup d'état
    1970–1973 Chile
    1976 Argentine coup d'état
    1979 Salvadoran coup d'état
    1979–1989 Afghanistan, Operation Cyclone
    1975–1992 Angola, UNITA
    1981–1990 Nicaragua, Contras
    1982 Chad
    1996 Iraq coup attempt
    


  • Yes, cause you don’t deserve it. Information is at your finger tips, you can’t comprehend them as you are not an expert of the domain, but you know how to contact some. While not always if one brings an extraordinary claim - like you did - or is uninformed their speech and sentiment is not on the same level to be regarded as others is. Especially since you do center your sentiment instead of that of affected.

    But I have a brain and when I see someone disparage a country’s education system based off of a single percentage statistic I’m allowed to shit on it.

    Show me where you did do “shit on it” when a person was “disparaging” a country which gets negative media bias in the US. Btw. you have no clue if they did do that based on a single statistic, that was only what was posted. No one will read a book as comment. You assume too much here. Also: The want to defend a country (or its reputation) instead of helping the people who could be affected is a problem, this means you are more a nationalist (and you seem to be US American, that means you are even centering your own country) than you care about people who are as example functionally illiterate.


  • I hope you are a young person. Over time you will learn that understanding a field takes time and that you need to spend months to get the required minimum knowledge for it. I suggest to you to actually speak with people who work in the field and do research in the field, then you will have done a short cut and can judge whether you want to help fix the problem, the structures or help individuals or if you just wanted to be right online, no matter the real life consequences for people around you.

    In any case you are currently lacking the knowledge to differentiate terms, how they are used and how certain numbers are generated. Instead of trying to become an expert I recommend to you again: Speak with the experts, it is a great shortcut.

    Besides that you haven’t demonstrated that you are willing to discuss, learn or do your work, which means that you aren’t really a person to be argued with online.