So I get banned from lemmy.ml What now?
So I get banned from lemmy.ml What now?
cross-posted from: https://lemm.ee/post/45204357
Yesterday, I created my account on Lemmy.ml because I want to become mod on !stardewvalley@lemmy.ml. And I posted this comic on !stardewvalley@lemmy.ml It's SDV game cutscene where Shane a NPC go watch Sports game with you kiss you accidentily but It was part of that event also player kiss Shane(NPC) back. Here's video for more context. And someone claimed it have SA(Sexual Assualt) From Hexbear Ofcourse. So, I should delete it. I said it was a part of game cutscene. And If main player doesn't love the Shane(NPC) then they don't need to complete this event. And Just as a sarcasm I added Yeah we shoule delete this entire community because this game is Woke like Woke Detector Steam Group said. That user think I am some anti-woke dickhead something like that IDK. And tell me to Kill My Self. What I do now? I wanted on become mod on .ml because community was already well established. I message dessaline but I am sure he will not unbanned me. :(
Did I really did something wrong? I don't know If I really did something wrong.
Link for that comic if embed doesn't work.
Create one lemm.ee !stardewvalley@lemm.ee
You're viewing part of a thread.
My point is that the division is very much black and white. The anarchists which joined the Bolsheviks got disillusioned, purged or killed. The anarchists of Spain learned similar lessons. Disagreements are allowed to happen in anarchist revolutions, sure, sometimes too much for their own good. But we've seen that in ML ones, persistent anarchist disagreement is an eventual path towards the front of a firing squad for being "counter-revolutionary".
At what point does dissent become counter-revolutionary? Never? Or is there a point where it makes sense to enforce unity?
No, when you join an succesful Anarchist movement and don't act like an anarchist, it's entryism. When you act as an anarchist, it's just anarchism.
So if I ideologically think the movement is flawed but materially support it I am considered by you an Anarchist? I disagree, to an extent. If a movement gains traction, it is more important to effectively support that movement, however it manifests, to the best of your abilities.
Again, it's all about the praxis. How one larps on a web forum is irrelevant
If a Marxist believes in Democratic Centralism and therefore joins the Anarchists in a united movement, rather than fracturing it, despite their disagreements, they are a Marxist.
So long as it anarchist theory which suppresses the largest anarchist lessons learned painfully in the 20th century, which is that left unity doesn't exist đ€·
That's your opinion, of course, and Hexbear's Anarchists clearly disagree. I suggest talking to them about it.
Starting to sound like a cult here, buddy...
I don't see that at all. If dbzer0 as an instance is generally hostile to support of AES, it isn't always useful nor fun to engage if you do support AES. I don't think it's "cult-like," neither instance is truly neutral ground.
At what point does dissent become counter-revolutionary? Never? Or is there a point where it makes sense to enforce unity?
No. It never makes sense to "enforce unity". Dissent doesn't become counter-revolutionary unless there's counter-revolutionary praxis involved. Since you're all about "left unity", you should be perfectly happy to let anarchists practice anarchist prefiguration inside a ML society, no?
So if I ideologically think the movement is flawed but materially support it I am considered by you an Anarchist?
No, but it means you're doing anarchism. I.e. it's not "left unity". It's just anarchism.
If a movement gains traction, it is more important to effectively support that movement, however it manifests, to the best of your abilities.
Again, a movement doesn't gain traction on its own. Its unity of praxis that makes it so, which is explicitly what your "left unity" is not doing, since it waits and see if someone else has traction to join it. It's nonsense!
Thatâs your opinion, of course, and Hexbearâs Anarchists clearly disagree. I suggest talking to them about it.
Sure, tell them to come over to /c/anarchism!
I donât see that at all. If dbzer0 as an instance is generally hostile to support of AES, it isnât always useful nor fun to engage if you do support AES.
dbzer0 is not hexbear. We don't ban people who are misguided about "AES", like hexbear would. Not do we dogpile them for wrongthink. As such, there's not problem in coming over to talk to us.
However I would be raising quite an eyebrow to any anarchist who avoids talking to other anarchists who don't accept state capitalism is a form of socialism.
No. It never makes sense to "enforce unity".
For clarity, does this extend to Capitalists? Fascists?
No, but it means you're doing anarchism. I.e. it's not "left unity". It's just anarchism.
I'm gonna disagree on the semantics there.
Again, a movement doesn't gain traction on its own. Its unity of praxis that makes it so, which is explicitly what your "left unity" is not doing, since it waits and see if someone else has traction to join it. It's nonsense!
On the contrary, it supports leftists to do what they believe is most effective and learn from other tendencies.
Sure, tell them to come over to /c/anarchism!
Why don't you make a thread inviting them? I'm not wanting to get accused of "brigading" like Hexbear always is.
dbzer0 is not hexbear. We don't ban people who are misguided about "AES", like hexbear would. As such, there's not problem in coming over to talk to us.
I've run into issues with dbzer0 as an instance regarding this, your rules surrounding MLs are deliberately written in a manner that limits discussion. If you change the rules to be more free-speech then I'll consider it, I used to do so until it became clear that I had to watch what I said, while takes like "Lenin wasn't a Marxist" stay up and even get postively upvoted.
For clarity, does this extend to Capitalists? Fascists?
Hah I knew it. No, dissent is not the same as platforming.
Iâm gonna disagree on the semantics there.
Really? So doing anarchist praxis is not anarchism?
On the contrary, it supports leftists to do what they believe is most effective and learn from other tendencies.
Supports how? With thoughts and prayers? That's not unity. That's just vibes.
Why donât you make a thread inviting them? Iâm not wanting to get accused of âbrigadingâ like Hexbear always is.
Because I think it's fruitless if they don't even bother to take part in completely neutral topics which have nothing to do with "AES".
Iâve run into issues with dbzer0 as an instance regarding this, your rules surrounding MLs are deliberately written in a manner that limits discussion. If you change the rules to be more free-speech then Iâll consider it, I used to do so until it became clear that I had to watch what I said, while takes like âLenin wasnât a Marxistâ stay up and even get postively upvoted.
The only explicit rule we have regarding MLs is "no tankie communities". And of course I'm not going to remove comments just to fit your sensibilities about Lenin.
But in any case I was not talking about you specifically, I was countering your point about Hexbear anarchists being too precious to venture outside a space where ML-style "AES" is not the accepted paradigm, which for real is an utterly an absurd thing for an anarchist to be hung upon.
Hah I knew it. No, dissent is not the same as platforming.
So then where is the line between reasonable dissent and platforming?
Really? So doing anarchist praxis is not anarchism?
It's semantics. If a Marxist uses Marxist analysis to side with Anarchists, they are still acting as a Marxist.
Supports how? With thoughts and prayers? That's not unity. That's just vibes.
As I already stated, many members of Hexbear are also members of PSL, FRSO, Food Not Bombs, or local leftist parties and groups.
Because I think it's fruitless if they don't even bother to take part in completely neutral topics which have nothing to do with AES.
So then why ask me to send them your way?
The only explicit rule we have regarding MLs is "no tankie communities". And of course I'm not going to remove comments just to fit your sensibilities about Lenin.
Never said you should remove the anti-Lenin comments, but that your moderators have bias. The "no tankie" bit is a good example, "tankie" is ill-defined and as such can be used to target whatever the moderator wishes.
But in any case I was not talking about you specifically, I was countering your point about Hexbear anarchists being too precious to venture outside a space where ML-style "AES" is not the accepted paradigm, which for real is an utterly an absurd thing for an anarchist to be hung upon.
It isn't about HB Anarchists being "precious," Hexbear is already active enough and has its own Anarchist communities. Jumping to dbzer0s isn't exactly the first choice for most people.
So then where is the line between reasonable dissent and platforming?
Very big subject and I doubt I have time to expand here. But to put it short: Aligned goals. You claim anarchists are part of the left, then their alternative positions are just dissent from your viewpoint, so according to your left unity, you need to afford them dissent. If you actually claim, that no, they don't share goals so we need to silence their free speech and suppress their actions, then don't prattle about "left unity" either.
Itâs semantics. If a Marxist uses Marxist analysis to side with Anarchists, they are still acting as a Marxist.
Again, praxis. What praxis are they doing! Anarchist or ML? Your Marxist analysis is irrelevant.
As I already stated, many members of Hexbear are also members of PSL, FRSO, Food Not Bombs, or local leftist parties and groups.
So? How is some Hexbear not taking part in FNB showing "left unity" to those who do?
Again, all you're showing here is that hexbear left unity is just vibes. "We all hang out in the same place and we all do different things, so we're united (somehow)"
So then why ask me to send them your way?
You suggested I should talk to them. If you have someone who's willing to do the effort, they are free to step outside of the hexbear compound and talk.
It isnât about HB Anarchists being âprecious,â Hexbear is already active enough and has its own Anarchist communities. Jumping to dbzer0s isnât exactly the first choice for most people.
And again, kinda cultish, but you do you.
Very big subject and I doubt I have time to expand here. But to put it short: Aligned goals. You claim anarchists are part of the left, then their alternative positions are just dissent from your viewpoint, so according to your left unity, you need to afford them dissent. If you actually claim, that no, they don't share goals so we need to silence their free speech and suppress their actions, then don't prattle about "left unity" either.
Wrong reading here. Anarchists aren't "dissent," what becomes dissent is splitting and factionalism.
Again, praxis. What praxis are they doing! Anarchist or ML? Your Marxist analysis is irrelevant.
Both.
So? How is some Hexbear not taking part in FNB showing "left unity" to those who do?
I think you're just trying to argue semantics here. Hexbear is made up of different leftists all pursuing similar goals through different strains.
You suggested I should talk to them. If you have someone who's willing to do the effort, they are free to step outside of the hexbear compound and talk.
I'll refrain, I am uninterested in being accused of brigading.
And again, kinda cultish, but you do you.
How?
Wrong reading here. Anarchists arenât âdissent,â what becomes dissent is splitting and factionalism.
So, Anarchists are allowed to exist in ML societies so long as they become or pretend to be MLs. Gotcha.
Both.
So you join a anarchist movement which has momentum, and along with direct action, you try to set up vanguard parties and shit?
If so, that's just entryism.
I think youâre just trying to argue semantics here. Hexbear is made up of different leftists all pursuing similar goals through different strains.
Not at all. But I do think you're trying to avoid the thrust of my argument by simply restating your position as a fact and taking us 4 replies back.
An anarchist doing anarchist stuff is not in "left unity" with an ML doing ML stuff because they hang out in the same bar.
An ML not doing anarchist stuff is not in "left unity" with an anarchist doing anarchist stuff.
An anarchist and an ML hanging out with each other is a just vibes.
An anarchist and an ML hanging out in a web forum with a peculiar style, is an online culture.
Without common praxis, there is no unity. This is why anarchists are in unity with each other even though syndicalists do syndicalist stuff, and mutualists do mutualist stuff etc. Because our multitude of direct action complement each other in prefiguring the system. You know what doesn't complement anarchist praxis and more often than not, counters it? ML praxis!
How?
Because cultists prefer to not venture out of their communities, and discourage interacting with people who don't already share the same worldview.
So, Anarchists are allowed to exist in ML societies so long as they become or pretend to be MLs. Gotcha.
No, and that's clearly a bad-faith reading. If the Anarchists refuse to work with the Marxists, to the point of directing the revolution against itself, then that's an issue.
So you join a anarchist movement which has momentum, and along with direct action, you try to set up vanguard parties and shit?
I don't see why you think Marxist analysis driving decision making requires the use of strategies like Vanguard parties. Vanguardism is a strategy, not the practice of Marxism.
Not at all. But I do think you're trying to avoid the thrust of my argument by simply restating your position as a fact and taking us 4 replies back.
I disagree.
Without common praxis, there is no unity. This is why anarchists are in unity with each other even though syndicalists do syndicalist stuff, and mutualists do mutualist stuff etc. Because our multitude of direct action complement each other in prefiguring the system. You know what doesn't complement anarchist praxis and more often than not, counters it? ML praxis!
Hexbear Anarchists would disagree, though I won't speak for them.
Because cultists prefer to not venture out of their communities, and discourage interacting with people who don't already share the same worldview.
You're guilty of the same, you've cultivated a community generally hostile towards Marxists while outwardly saying you don't have a problem with them. I think it's better to own up to your biases and how they have impacted your community, rather than try to present dbzer0 as uniquely open to discussion.
On that note, I don't think there's any real discussion to be had going forward with this convo, we clearly aren't seeing eye to eye on what constitutes what type of praxis nor what left-unity looks like, and therefore I don't think it makes sense to continue wasting what I assume is a nice Sunday for the both of us.
No, and thatâs clearly a bad-faith reading. If the Anarchists refuse to work with the Marxists, to the point of directing the revolution against itself, then thatâs an issue.
How is it a bad faith reading when you reiterate it immediately after? Who decides what is "the point of directing the revolution against itself". Anarchists will surely tell you they are doing the exact opposite.
I donât see why you think Marxist analysis driving decision making requires the use of strategies like Vanguard parties. Vanguardism is a strategy, not the practice of Marxism.
I don't give two wooden nickels about the "Marxist analysis driving decision making". I want you to tell me what ML praxis you're doing when you declared "Both" earlier!
Hexbear Anarchists would disagree, though I wonât speak for them.
If they disagree with core anarchist theory then one has to start adding scare quotes to "Anarchist"
Youâre guilty of the same, youâve cultivated a community generally hostile towards Marxists while outwardly saying you donât have a problem with them. I think itâs better to own up to your biases and how they have impacted your community, rather than try to present dbzer0 as uniquely open to discussion.
You realize one of our most popular communities is run my a Marxist and promotes left unity, yes? Please don't project.
On that note, I donât think thereâs any real discussion to be had going forward with this convo, we clearly arenât seeing eye to eye on what constitutes what type of praxis nor what left-unity looks like, and therefore I donât think it makes sense to continue wasting what I assume is a nice Sunday for the both of us.
Eh, I just saw this at the end of my reply. No need to reply if you don't want to.