this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2023
364 points (99.5% liked)
chapotraphouse
13473 readers
1 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank
Dunk posts in general go in the_dunk_tank, not here
Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from the_dunk_tank
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Nope, I'm with you on all that. That's also not what the comic is highlighting. Trans people exist and deserve all the rights everyone else has. Transphobes are pieces of shit and should be dealt with accordingly.
"I think Western institutions and media are not being entirely honest about their geopolitical opinions" is not like the phrasing I see from hexbear users out in the wild.
What you see is the logical conclusion of when you step back and realize that people are always supporting this year's war drive and claiming last year's war drive is ancient history and all in the past.
You say that like a whole lot of us didn't have that realization decades ago.
No experience is universal and your logical conclusion won't be the same for everyone.
Even if it were by throwing something aggressive in the face of someone who isn't even on the same road you're just going to come off as an ass. You drive others deeper into their position rather than getting anywhere productive. Which you may not care about on the surface, but then I'd argue you're just pushing a different war drive.
You say that like they haven't held that position through multiple farcical wars.
I'm not the one driving them deeper into their position. They have chosen to do so themselves. Which is why they are more concerned about my civility than the millions starved and killed in the name of the rules based international order.
🥰
You say that like your know their level of concern or activity in regards to those.
Consider someone starting to consider view points beyond how they were raised. Are they more or less likely to go toward someone with inflammatory rhetoric? The concept of a pipeline is hardly a new one.
Believe it or not the world isn't divisible into two camps. Why would you not encourage people to flow towards a direction that should be inviting?
unironically, the bullying takes work. many of the people on this website are here because they got pressured for bad takes, got shocked and confused, and stuck around to learn more. others went wow those commies are funny and ended up doing the reading. civility only protects the status quo. we live in a fucked up world and pretending it's not by masking how fucked up it is that people defend that status quo serves absolutely no one but the powerful. any tool that breaks people away from that reflexive defensive posture towards extant power is only an immeasurable good.
So if it breaks one person away but twenty more say they knew they were right about all them and refuse to ever attempt to engage in discussion again, that's good?
Yeah, it's fucked. We have people insisting that trans people are grooming kids while preachers keep getting arrested for actually doing far more than the trans folks are even accused of. But if you throw a whole lot of the country into the deep end of the pool they'll just drown while they take all the lifeguards down with them. But if you can let them dip their toes in the shallow end then you may find them swimming laps before you realize.
queer people started getting rights and acceptance after they started throwing bricks, not before. rights are taken, never granted. the genocidal policies will succeed in their project if they are not met forcefully. as a trans person, you can fuck all the way off - I will not be polite and civil with people who think my right to exist is open to debate. to accept the premise and engage in debate denies my own humanity. I exist, the people I love exist, and we will fight to the grave anyone who denies it. and I abso-fucking-lutely do not give a shit about the feelings of debatelords.
There's a huge gap between people who think your right to exist is open to debate and a random person on the internet who doesn't know what the position of the instance is.
I pointed out that the overly polite statement in the comic is not reflective of reality and plenty of you are doing a great job of demonstrating that.
once again, fuck alllllll the way off.
People have been nothing but patient with you in this thread. You're the one throwing vitriol and being an asshole here.
it's self evident, given the issues they raise
Being able to tell the concerns of a person based off limited interactions over the Internet is a skill the world has never observed.
Being willing to assume you know such things, however, is incredibly common
thats a very lemmy.midwest thing to say
You're the second person to mention NATO. Where have I said anything about anything with NATO?
so you didn't connect the dots when they talk about the international community or the coalition of the willing?
thats why people don't care to be civil to supporters. that and the odds they live in one the countries being attacked.
Where have I discussed NATO's wars? Seriously
It's been all day and my complaint is still misrepresentation.
Are you saying you are not aware of "concern trolling"?
I'm very aware that it, like any form of trolling, is utilized as an excuse when it's not what's happened.
Which is not to say that it doesn't happen. False positives and false negatives are as much a reality as the thing itself.
What's the phrasing, show an example or two, don't just assert back your shit up bro
Probably not the most extreme example but it was relatively easy to find
uh, am I supposed to see an issue with that statement?
Dougee we've gotten transphobes, pedos, racists and incels coming into our instance, if that's the worst you got from us, consider yourself lucky
is aesthetically different or semantically different? because that's pretty much what I see. people get aggro about it sometimes but the semantic content of what they're saying is still what's in the image.
It’s a comic, Doug
They're words, ShareThatBread. Do you understand how both foster thoughts?
This style of comic always does this, though, it reduces the arguments down to the basics to demonstrate why the other side is wrong. I've definitely seen many a Hexbear user get called a bot for implying that NATO countries are being dishonest about their geopolitical opponents, that's all the comic is trying to say really.
I don't doubt it. It seems like a large swath of the Internet has a hard time understanding that their own thoughts and experiences aren't universal.
I'll absolutely agree that NATO countries are dishonest about their geopolitical opponents. I would also say those opponents are dishonest about NATO countries. I don't think that's at all far fetched. It bothers me that it seems to come off controversial around here.
Well, yeah, but as westerners we can't do anything about how Russian or Chinese people react to their governments' messaging, we can only make sure to defeat imperialist narratives in our own spheres. Sometimes downplaying the negative aspects about other countries, especially the negative aspects that our own nations use for propaganda, is a good rhetorical tactic to keep the focus on what we can do to make positive change happen and not fall for the narratives that are directed at us.
I don't agree but I can respect your position.
What about when we get first hand accounts from trusted sources in regards to the state of life in those countries. Would you ignore them to continue keeping focus or acknowledge them?
Well, how can acknowledging them help foster an internationalist working class? If there's a way to promote solidarity based on first hand accounts, sure why not, but if there isn't it's neither here nor there.
For example let's say we get some accounts from China. If the people of China are prospering, I can agitate and say that a better world is possible, just look at China, and at the same time it's a good argument against intervening in China. If things are bad in China, depending on the reasons, I could either analyze how their policies could have been different and save that criticism for when it's time to build a new socialist experiment, so we can learn from the mistakes of history. If the reasons stem from Western economic policies, then I can agitate by saying that our outdated system is harming millions of people. What I would never do, is shout from the rooftops that life in China is horrible, or worse than here, because that drives down morale and it makes people more likely to be complacent and fall for false consciousness or end-of-historyism. The main point is, as socialists, we should agree on supporting no war but the class war, and as proles we should be agitating, educating, and organizing; we should not be imperialist lap dogs and do the State Department's job for them.
Maybe the source of the disagreement here is that you could see discourse and political discussion as an endeavor that should be illuminating and pursue truth. I think there's value to that, but not in discourse, I save the truth seeking for when I read calmly and have the time to look for definitions/relevant historical facts. To me, the point of public discourse and political discussion is to exert class power and advance the position of the working class, heighten the contradictions when reasonable, and in even the smallest way to set the stage for a progressive change toward the next stage of history i.e. revolution. That can also involve dispelling some of the fictions of capitalist ideology, it can involve rhetoric, appealing to people's material situation, etc.
I can agree with your assessment. I absolutely understand the value of, shall we call it directed truth?
Maybe some of it is hope that people will be willing and able to see and accept the whole truth of a situation. Some things are better for group a and some for group b. If we work together we can find the best of both.
I suspect you don't have that same hope. I could absolutely understand that and maybe even consider you the better off of the two of us for that specific circumstance.
If I didn't recognize the fascists I was standing next to (or their narratives) then the people getting mad at them would probably seem unreasonable to me too.