Technically correct, but misses the point. It's the stuff of: "If you haven't thrown out your cellphone because of its links to capitalist abuse, you deserve to suffer" or something. The Nib was making fun of this years ago, with its comic about "we should improve society somewhat", "yet you participate in society, curious". Expecting individuals to voluntarily find their way to the right decisions or else they deserve to suffer has more in common with liberalism than marxism-leninism. Treating individuals as moral failures (and therefore deserving of suffering) because they haven't rejected every aspect of the society they live in, in order to fight against it, is asinine.

This isn't to take it to another extreme and be in support of having no standards at all for how people behave or who we choose to organize with (a context where this matters a lot more). It's normal to have lines drawn in the sand. But over being on Twitter? For god's sake, they're an internet poster, not a war criminal, and you aren't the same as a Nazi simply by posting on a platform that got taken over by one. That's why I made the comparison to living in the US. It's one of the most grotesque empires in human history, but that doesn't mean everyone who lives there is guilty by proxy with full awareness, complicity, and consent to its crimes. Guilt by proxy is the kind of stuff people use to (flimsily) justify genocide, not the kind of reasoning we need to be getting anywhere near. A person who lives with an abusive spouse is not the same as the abusive spouse. We need to be focused more on solutions than on ivory tower moralizing that conveniently leaves out the ways our own behaviors and associations are linked to the global system of exploitation.