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
At what point does dissent become counter-revolutionary? Never? Or is there a point where it makes sense to enforce unity?
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.
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.
That's your opinion, of course, and Hexbear's Anarchists clearly disagree. I suggest talking to them about it.
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.
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?
No, but it means you're doing anarchism. I.e. it's not "left unity". It's just anarchism.
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!
Sure, tell them to come over to /c/anarchism!
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.
For clarity, does this extend to Capitalists? Fascists?
I'm gonna disagree on the semantics there.
On the contrary, it supports leftists to do what they believe is most effective and learn from other tendencies.
Why don't you make a thread inviting them? I'm not wanting to get accused of "brigading" like Hexbear always is.
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.
Hah I knew it. No, dissent is not the same as platforming.
Really? So doing anarchist praxis is not anarchism?
Supports how? With thoughts and prayers? That's not unity. That's just vibes.
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".
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.
So then where is the line between reasonable dissent and platforming?
It's semantics. If a Marxist uses Marxist analysis to side with Anarchists, they are still acting as a Marxist.
As I already stated, many members of Hexbear are also members of PSL, FRSO, Food Not Bombs, or local leftist parties and groups.
So then why ask me to send them your way?
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.
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.
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.
Again, praxis. What praxis are they doing! Anarchist or ML? Your Marxist analysis is irrelevant.
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)"
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.
And again, kinda cultish, but you do you.
Wrong reading here. Anarchists aren't "dissent," what becomes dissent is splitting and factionalism.
Both.
I think you're just trying to argue semantics here. Hexbear is made up of different leftists all pursuing similar goals through different strains.
I'll refrain, I am uninterested in being accused of brigading.
How?
So, Anarchists are allowed to exist in ML societies so long as they become or pretend to be MLs. Gotcha.
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.
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!
Because cultists prefer to not venture out of their communities, and discourage interacting with people who don't already share the same worldview.
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.
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.
I disagree.
Hexbear Anarchists would disagree, though I won't speak for them.
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.
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 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!
If they disagree with core anarchist theory then one has to start adding scare quotes to "Anarchist"
You realize one of our most popular communities is run my a Marxist and promotes left unity, yes? Please don't project.
Eh, I just saw this at the end of my reply. No need to reply if you don't want to.