Apparently calling for the use of force to defend your country from invaders is "advocating violence". Also: being anti-American in general is against the rules
Apparently calling for the use of force to defend your country from invaders is "advocating violence". Also: being anti-American in general is against the rules
All from in this thread in !world@lemmy.world about a chant at a British music festival where an artist said "death, death to the IDF".
After other users were quoting that chant in the comments and had comments removed and banned, the hero of our story, @theacharnian@lemmy.ca (appearing as "acargitz") pointed out that under international law, fighting an occupying force is legitimate. But apparently not under world news rules, as their removed comments and the many explanations from mods make clear in the thread.
Equally against the rules is the call for the eradication of an organisation or business, even without an explicit call to violence against individual members of the business.
In the same thread: user @DeathToTheIDF@lemmings.world had comments removed for being anti-American "(again)", though I couldn't see the first time. It's not even clear to me how the removed comments were anti-American.
Bonus points for the "DC Comics" removal reason. Though this seems to be incompetence, rather than malice.
You're viewing a single thread.
if [[ instance == "lemmy.world" ]] && [[ topic == "Palestine" ]]; then echo "PTB"; fiSerious now, PTB.
Since the existence of the state of Israel causes violence in the Levant, anyone defending the "survival" of that ethnostate is promoting violence. And yet you don't see LW mods removing comments defending it - why?
Oh geez, it gets even worse.
According to the mod @jordanlund@lemmy.world, even just advocating an end to genocide is worthy of a ban. Like, when you're really specific and say you're talking about ending institutions that are doing genocide rather than people, that gets you a ban.
And so is calling out a person who is advocating for genocide by their choice to silence anti-genocide views. (Officially, my ban was for being mean, but let's be honest, the real reason is that they felt called out over their support for genocide.)
Is !world@quokk.au still around?
Seems to be. It's certainly where I'd prefer to post, although it's not clear to me what its intent is. What makes "world" news? Non-American? That's my assumption for the LW one. But on quokk.au is it non-Australian?
Regardless, where I choose to post doesn't help when I'm commenting on another post. Which is most often the case in any world news Community.
From my understanding, it's the world without restriction.
US News, if it ever spams up the feed with minutiae articles would be put to a vote. It seems to be working well so far. We have a diverse range of international media sources and I have even see some Unicorn Riot articles.
Alternatively, stupid fucking users can't tell the difference between removing calls to violence and supporting genocide.
Then they get butthurt over a temp ban for repeated rule 6 violations.
If you're going to participate in a community, READ THE FUCKING RULES.
"Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time."
https://lemmy.world/modlog?page=1&actionType=All&userId=135438
And yet when I went point by point explaining how the comment that you banned the other user for clearly was not a call to violence, you banned me instead. You still have not attempted to justify how you believe it was a call to violence.
In the absence of even an attempt to justify you actions otherwise, the only obvious interpretation is that you want to avoid criticism of Israel's genocide.
Rule fucking six:
"regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.""
This you?
Unlike other mods you bullied off Lemmy, I cannot be bullied. Take your bitch ass to Jon like you did with Wren, go on, I fucking DARE you.
Ipsos custodes ipsos, hon
If you want yo be so unaccountable you literally punish people for acknowledging that you exist you are definitionally a power tripping bastard.
Hell, that goes beyond 'power tripping bastard on the internet'. This reads as a textbook symptom of some seriously fucked shit. You are very likely Not Well. See if help exists and is accessible in your area.
You know how often I think about what people on lemmy think about me?
Not at all. Not even a little bit.
You say, proving youve done so at least once.
I wasn't talking about peoples feelings or opinions at all there.
It took me way too long to find and unsubscribe from all the communities you moderate.
I like how every chance you get, you choose to avoid addressing the actual issue of why you're banning users for breaking a rule that they very clearly did not break. You choose to concentrate on the part where I hurt your feelings 😭 instead of the underlying lie that the other user was inciting violence in the comment that got them banned.
Take your bitch ass to Jon like you did with Wren, go on, I fucking DARE you.
Lol, nice job completely misreading what happened there... I have to assume it's on purpose.
Unlike other mods you bullied off Lemmy, I cannot be bullied. Take your bitch ass to Jon like you did with Wren, go on, I fucking DARE you.
Tho you're wrong in this thread, I do admire that spunk! I can appreciate anyone refusing to be bullied off of Lemmy; lots of people tried to bully me off of Lemmy. So definitely don't leave Lemmy.
But alas, it's .world, so I'm gonna have to say PTB! Because .world is one of the most toxic instances on Lemmy, and your comm is one of the most toxic comms.
Is there a rule against being factual? 🤣
Facts are encouraged, attacking me for being pro-genocide is not factual.
attacking me for being pro-genocide is not factual.
Well, no one's going to praise you for being pro-genocide.
The grand irony of you calling another user stupid is rich.
Or reading the rules
Well its the secret rules we're supposed to read.
Making them seen explicitly, for yourself or for others, is heresy. Not knowing them is treason.
Wait we can't question mod actions now??
You can, but if you call a mod "a fucking maniac" in their own community, expect at a minimum for that comment to be removed and a temp ban.
Then make the rule dont be dicks to mods not something vague like it stands now
So... if I'm reading this correctly, simply observing the fact of moderator's existence is against the rules under the sole discretion of the moderator-being-regarded? And the exclusive written remedy for this infraction is the removal of the relevant comment? And you don't see a conflict of personal and professional interest or how the combination of your actions and the rules are perceived to be a power trip.
Tbf obswrving that a mod exists, were i one of those, would be a sick enough burn I'd need a milligram of lsd and two whole chocolate cakes to cope.
We remove any comment attacking other users and DOUBLY so when it's attacking moderation.
But that seems to be the whole point of PTB - "How dare they moderate meeeeeeee??!?? I'm special! I deserve no moderation!"
Idk bro it's giving "2 young black state congressmen expelled from congress for speaking truth to power on the pretext of decorum"
Idk if that's the best analogy when they're so against BLM. Or maybe makes it the perfect one
https://www.opb.org/news/series/racenw/race-northwest-united-states-jordan-lund-portland/
We remove any comment attacking other users and DOUBLY so when it’s attacking moderation.
That seems completely arse-backward. Which I guess makes sense given who we're talking about, but it's still disappointing. Mods would be held to a higher standard. Making the punishment for being mean to a mod harsher than any other user is like when bootlickers believe police should be entitled to abuse the public but the punishment for defending yourself is more extreme than for actual violence against random people.
Forget any specific case. I'm not arguing for you to reverse my ban. This is just bad on principle.
PTB shows exactly why shutting down mod abuse is important. The last thing we want is shit-show comment threads like this in our communities.
We don't allow users to bitch slap each other, why should mods be forced to take it?
PTB shows exactly why shutting down mod abuse is important.
In this case you should apologise and reverse all your actions.
Or resign.
What about the violence it is okay to advocate though? That's okay, right?
Why is that? Maybe you could outline that a little more clearly, because the implicit rule is clashing with the explicit rule here, and some clarification would I'm sure cut down on the need for mod work.
It's really simple, don't advocate for violence.
For example, I just removed a comment from a Trump thread:
"Will no one rid us of this turbulent President?"
Seems innocuous, right? Nope, it's a call for assassination.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_no_one_rid_me_of_this_turbulent_priest%3F
Not allowed. It's an EDUCATED call for assassination, but still a call for assassination.
Other comments below it were more direct and also removed.
Right because hes one of the people who it's not okay to call for violence against. So no degree of structure that would harm him is acceptable to endorse.
Whereas for certain other people, suggesting they shouldn't be killed is a de facto call for violence against some of thwse protected groups.
Im just suggesting if you clarified who is on which list, people would be a lot better at self censoring and make less work for you. You can't blame people for failing to obey such complex rules when theyre not laid out clearly.
No, it's not OK to call for violence against ANYONE. Full stop. There is no list of "OK to threaten this person or group, but not these others."
The only stuff that slides are the comments that never get reported. Mods are volunteers and we have lives, we aren't reading every comment looking to fuck with threads.
We DO read every report and take actions based on them.
Well ive seen quite a few calls for and defenses of things that get people killed.
I've seen your server called a 'safe space for zionism'. Repeatedly. You shelter and propagate violence. You are violent.
Actual total non-violence is an extrenely radical position, one i dont think you're taking, one i don't think you're brave enough to genuinely hold and take the shit for. One i may not be radical or brave enough to hold earnestly.
You accept, and favor, some violence. If you won't admit it; that's worse.
I'm sure there's TONS of stuff out there that gets missed. We all missed the anti-natalist community until the mod there decided to blow up a fertility clinic.
But what we don't miss is the shit that gets reported. There are tools in place to make sure all the mods in a group are notified if reports start stacking up.
But the stuff we miss because either a) we don't see it or b) it's not reported, doesn't mean we're going to apologize for the shit we DO remove.
I think you do support violence, and your replies elsewhere confirn that. You just like to use cutesy words and convoluted mechanisms so you're alienated from it's exercise and distanced from its responsibility.
Nobodys blaming you for the anti natalist guy. That one was fucking weird.
You have absolutely no idea what I do and do not support because nobody yet has asked me how I personally feel. :) My Personal opinions don't enter into it, if they did, that would be bad moderation.
Personally, my opinion on Israel and Gaza is the genocide will continue until either a) every last Palestinian is dead or b) Someone has the balls to invade Israel, disarm them, force them to stop and arrest and execute every war criminal involved from the lowliest IDF soldier all the way up to Netanyahu himself.
No country on earth is willing to do b. So take a wild guess what the end result will be? Should to be that way? Absolutely not, but again, nobody has the will to make the necessary change to make it happen.
Personally, my opinion on Ukraine and Russia is that no people fights harder than when they're overturning a foreign invasion. Properly armed, Ukraine will RUIN Russia.
But the key bit there is "properly armed" and the Republicans running the US absolutely do not want that to happen. We can change that in the '26 election, we WON'T, but it would be nice if we did.
But if someone comes into my groups advocating for the execution of Netanyahu, I will remove that comment because it violates the rules of the community. The community does not exist to promulgate violence, regardless how how I personally feel about it.
No, it's not OK to call for violence against ANYONE. Full stop
Are you going to remove comments saying "Israel has a right to self defence"? As Israeli "self defence" means murdering civilians by any means available.
No, because every country has the right to self defense, that is not a call to violence.
Aren't Palestinians having right to self defence?
Sure they do, but their self defense in the real world has absolutely nothing to do with our community rules.
They cannot advocate for killing Israelis in our group any more than Israelis can advocate for killing Palestinians. We DO NOT allow that shit.
We control what we can in the groups we moderate, we don't moderate the real world, that's outside our responsibility.
For real tho, Lemmy needs to stop with the murder talk. I am seeing a lot of it. Murder execs. Murder presidents, etc. I'm all for "fuck tha Man!" but let's not glorify or advocate for murder. It's pretty sickening. It's not a good thing for Lemmy to have a bunch of extremists talking about murdering people (or using code-words for it).
It's really shitty that there are entire classes of people who choose violence to enforce their injustice, which itself is violence.
Watching people die slow on the streets like that is horrible. Even when I'm not one of them, having to watch people deteriorate and die out here is violence against me. Knowing that I'm never more than a couple consecutive bad months from being one of them. Social murder is murder, and it's the worst most vile kind, because you know how many people could how little it would take to save you. I wish we wouldnt do that. I agree. No more murder. Never again, please, if we could. No more letting these extremists run around murdering people-what, genuinely, is the difference between land mines/cluster munitions, and destructive housing policy?
I know this is a choice, but ive watched people die slow of cancer. I've watched bodies gradually degrade and fail. It's nightmare shit. And I'm sick of drowning in environmental contaminants that cause it. I'm sick of people who peacefully work for better being literally blown up by the fbi. I agree. No more murder. We shouldn't let tgese extremists run around murdering people.
Choosing to enfirce violent property arrangements with brute violence rather than sharing like we all learned to do as literal children, choosing to violently suppress speech rather than let people make their own decisions, violent combustive destruction of the world we all have to live in and preventing the ways to fix it by deploying nen with guns. I agree. The violence, the killing, must stop, before we drown in this river of blood we will not stop shedding.
So, we're both mad as hell and agree it should stop. Too much murder. What to do? Asking and dialogue get you shot at and war crimed. Ive tried.
Fuck your stupid rules that restrict Palestinians right
Palestinians aren't arguing here. They have actual worries bigger than what people are saying online.
You know they do use the internet, and tend to be pretty literate, right? I don't think you can conclusively say they're not around.
They may very well be, though given the devastation to their infrastructure, it seems increasingly unlikely.
And anyone is welcome to come and discuss all the various and voluminous crimes of the Israeli state, so long as they do not advocate for violence.
My old roomate's brother was a doctor during one of the multiple illegal Israeli occupations of Southern Lebanon.
The IDF would show up at his house in the middle of the night, tell him if he resisted he would be shot, haul him off to god knows where to treat some prisoner, and then dump him at the side of the road like so much garbage.
Want to call to end that? Great! Prosecute that shit? Absolutely. Call for the deaths of everyone involved? That crosses the line and will get your shit removed.
Want to call to end that? Great! Prosecute that shit? Absolutely. Call for the deaths of everyone involved? That crosses the line and will get your shit removed.
🤣🤣🤣
Next time when history repeats and yet other nazis start occupying some nations and murdering people, ensure you have some stern words for them.
Next time when history repeats and yet other nazis start occupying some nations and murdering people, ensure you have some stern words for them.
He'll have the banhammer for anyone who doesn't love them and everything they do.
We're an internet forum, do not ever confuse that with "history".
You want to organize locally? Great, nobody is stopping you. You want to arm yourself and stick it to the fascists? Go for it.
You want to do that in our communities? Go fuck yourself. Not allowed.
Go fuck yourself. Not allowed
Carry on, you are funnier with every post 🤣🤣🤣
Putting aside how legal prosecution is absolutely violence, state intervention is violence, laws are violemce. They're just a certain sort of violence tgat you support, that targets but does not protect some people and protects but does not target others. Which was my entire point about what you believe and thank you for finally acknowledging that.
Putting that and how good it feels to hear mostly aside for a moment:
A former head of msf once said that the only way to stop a genocide once it gets started in earnest is killing the perpetrators. Nothing i have ever read contradicts this. You let them kill til theyre sated, or you fucking kill them.
Anything less is permission. Anything less is a call to let them keep killing. Anything kess than a call to violently stop them, is a call for their violence to continue. Condemnation of calls to violently stop them, unless some other force is in place and acting, is a powerful endorsement of their actions. A state in genocidal bloodlust tends to stay in genocidal bloodlust unless acted upon. Pretty sure that's from a math textbook.
These mother fuckers post their war crimes on fucking tiktok, they've been doing it for years without consequence. Saying 'call for them to be prosecuted!' is a slightly more repulsive rephrasing of 'lubricate your favirite sex toy with the blood of palestinian children, queue up some murder videos, then shove it up your ass until you're shivering with pleasure'. It is a call to violence. Particularly gross particularly spectacular violemve.
When institutions support violence, calling for those same institutions to magically stop being evil, to just stop for no reason but your asking, is supporting violence. It's saying "this violence is there right. How dare you call for them to suffer in kind?".
When calls BDS gets called and potentially punished as terrorism, by the governments of nuclear armed world powers, anything short of violence is not opposition.
And it sucks. Not a fan of violence. That is why i believe the zionists must be killed, and killed not just killed until they stop, but killed until they lose the capacity to restart violence. Because that, or fucking ultra-genocide world war 3 are the only two options they have left us. Anything short of 'zionists must die' is 'i masturbate to ultra genocide world war three'. There's more to it than that; mostly fridge horror about the political implications of their whole project, but it doesnt really matter here.
The non-violent options are off the table. They blew up the part of the table those options were on, repeatedly, for decades longer than I've been alive, and now there isnt enough table for both parties. Which violence do you endorse? Silence is a vote for zionist terror groups like the idf. Go.
Your OPINION is that laws and prosecution are violence, that's absolutely not the case and really only fringe elements legitimately believe that.
Laws and prosecution are the cornerstones of society, going back to Hamurabi.
You're welcome to be an anarchist if you want, you're WRONG, but you have the right to be wrong. 😉
your opinion is that laws and prosecution are violence
Okay, ill just ignore all the dudes with guns and dead/broken bodies, then. Ill forget the rape, the bones that healed wrong, the masdivel increased cancer risk. It's fine, ill be fine; it wasn't "violence" so it's fine.
cornerstone of society
Citation needed. And i dont read cuneiform. I read snow crash, so you can't make me.
have a right to be wrong
Not according to your entirely nonviolent men with guns.
Edit: saying pithy shit you don't believe so you dont have to acknowledge your other lies is not charming or cute, unless youre a cat.
the entire rest of the thing including a worked example you're just skipping over
So...
Snow Crash is a GREAT book, but untill you're better educated we cannot continue this conversation.
Society exists as a series of rules and regulations. Enforcing those rules and regulations is what makes it all work.
Failing to do that results in the collapse of civil order, we're seeing that with Trump 2.0 right now. Convicted on 34 felony counts, nobody had the balls to enforce it, and here we are.
Are you kidding me? It’s not fringe. It’s settled fact. It’s foundational to statehood itself. Please pick up a polysci for dummies book, of ask any LLM. They’ll all tell you that the state enforces its laws through its monopoly on violence and the threat thereof. Deeply unserious.
How stupid can you be to think palestinians are not happy when idf soldiers who are comiting genocide and killed dozens of their family members die in gaza
Lemkin's original definition of genocide includes just destroying everythibg a culture is, including its methods of social reproduction so that it cannot continue, whether a single drop of blood is spilled or not.
So with a broad definition, ending the genocide would be genocide. Thinking about the implications of that is antisemitic.
I'm going to reply to myself because there's a huge discussion in the comment chain, and I'd rather speak freely than specifically address what they're saying. And because this is 90% rant.
A country is not the people it rules over. A country is not a human being. A country is an abstract structure of power. A country is an "it".
No country should be seen as having a "right of self defence" or crap like that; it's the same as saying "I hate people so much I'd put them on the same level as an abstract structure." It's genuinely disgusting.
And someone might say "well ackshyually the Israelis have a right of self defence". Sure; unlike the state of Israel, the Israelis are human beings, they do have the right. However (and this is important), the ones joining the war against Hamas and the Palestinians are not just "defending themselves"; they're putting themselves at risk to defend that abstract structure.
And people keep oversimplifying this shit as if it was "Israel was attacked, so it's self-defending". More accurately, what's happening is that the state of Israel was attacked by Hamas, and using the attack as excuse to kill the Palestinians.
It gets worse. The continued existence of that "it" is causing people to be killed, since it's an ethnostate on the same level as Apartheid South Africa. By assigning "it" a human right of self-defence, you're giving the "it" an implicit thumbs up to kill actual human beings. Now you aren't even putting human beings on the same level as an "it", you're putting them below the "it".
inb4 something that sounds pretty much like "B-but right of self defence! Apartheid South Africa is defending itself, from terrorists like Rolihlahla! Are you siding with the terrorists?".
(I do plan to read replies but I'm not arsing myself to reply to them.)
Bash, my beloathed
