Mods
Actions
- Removed posters comments
- Banned posters from community
Mod log
- Original comment that was deleted with reason of “Tankie apologia”.
- When another user comments has suspicions of mods actions, Mod replies with this.
- Poster replies in exasperation explaining perspective, rationale, and offline experiences. Comment gets deleted and purged.
Explanation
The original comment I made was stating that alienation of someone by frustrating their political beliefs is not a way to convince them of anything.
That being their genuine friend goes a long way in helping someone rather then attacking them.
That together they both can work together for a better future.
That you can be annoyed, but that should be swallowed because that is what it means to be part of a community.
You will always be annoyed one way or another in a community, that is the beauty of a community, that there are different people that may annoy you slightly, but working together to still be a community.
The moderator disagrees with this, viewing it as “tankie apologia”.
When I replied, explaining why I made my post and my background, My post was removed and I was banned from the community.
Thank you @db0@lemmy.dbzer0.com for reminding me on this missing context: https://lemmy.ml/comment/17251624
In my reply post, I wrote that “advocating for war on any country is not political flavoring”.
That cannot be swallowed, and one should not befriend such a person without sufficient care for ones own wellbeing.
I had wrote explicitly thinking of people who suport Russia against Ukraine, Israel over Palestine, and Assadists etc.
My purged comment also states that “people seeking to punish / attack LGBTQIA+ people is not political flavoring”.
I whole heartingly believe trans rights are human rights.
Free HRT and gender affirming care for all!
To remove an otherwise popular comment advocating for support what I feel are healthy behaviors, then name call someone as a “authoritarian” and a “tankie apologist” is disingenuous and corrupt to me.
Remedy
Personally I would like my comments restored so at least others see a different way of looking at things. I have no qualms with remaining banned.
Perhaps I should have not commented in reply to the mod, but they had already removed my post and I had little to lose.
Otherwise, I am very tired of this on the internet, I am tired of tribalism and the lack of empathy in this world.
What do you all think, should I have even made my original comment if I already knew it would be fruitless?
Whether Engels considered himself a communist is irrelevant (he was of course an authoritarian as a factory owner hypocrite) to whether “on authority” is a good essay.
Your arguments make no sense. “did Lenin consider himself communist? Aha but he was authoritarian too. Checkmate liberal!” just inane bullshit.
In any case, what MLs call “communism” and what anarchists do is something completely different, which is why “left unity” is bullshit as well.
I didn’t ask if Engles considered himself a communist. I asked if he was a communist. Again, it’s a very simple and straightforward line of logic.
Logical maturation won’t get you out of this pickle. The op’s point was that it doesn’t matter what you call yourself, in practice those two terms, as anarchists define them, are incompatible.
There’s no “logical manipulation” nor am I in any sort of “pickle” to start with. OP’s point was not that “it doesn’t matter what you call yourself,” maybe that’s your point, but the point that’s actually being discussed is whether someone can reasonably call themselves a communist if they’re also an “authoritarian.”
You seem to have completely misunderstood me - when I said, “Of course, On Authority is just the shortest and most to the point work demonstrating the view in a way that is completely impossible to deny,” and you responded, “lol,” you seem to have interpreted that as me saying that Engles’ arguments were so compelling that everyone would have to agree with them. That’s not what I was saying. What I meant was that it’s impossible to deny that Engles holds the position in question, of being an “authoritarian,” or at least, not shying away from the label.
If the guys whose names are on the damn Communist Manifesto were authoritarian, then I would politely suggest that y’all stop trying to gatekeep the word “communist” from us and just go off and find some other word for whatever it is you’re doing.
nah. We’ll keep challenging your old white men heroes and their shitty takes all we want.
I never said you couldn’t? Call my takes shitty all you want (it seems to be the height of your criticism so its not particularly challenging lol), just stop trying to appropriate the word communist. Get your own word.
Lol that’s your ultimate complaint? If so, no. The word existed before Marx. But we do tend to call it anarcho-communism to not be confused what most people associate with tankies and it seems to work mostly well enough.
No, it’s my original complaint. If you actually followed the train of the conversation, the other person claimed that “You cannot claim to be a communist if you’re an authoritarian,” to which I asked if Engles was a communist, and if she had read “On Authority.” Clearly the thing that we were talking about was whether “authoritarians” can be communists.
You jumped in to challenge my point except apparently you just wanted to go off on some unrelated tangent about anarchism vs Marxism in general. Now you’re complaining that I’m talking about the thing that we were talking about instead of whatever tf you’re trying to talk about.
So what you’re arguing is that Karl Marx was not a communist? Have I got that right?
yes, by the OPs definition of communism, or by the general definition of “stateless classless society”, communism is incompatible from authoritarianism. Whether Engels called himself Communist, or was communist in theory (because he certainly wasn’t in praxis), is irrelevant. It’s as irrelevant as Rothbard calling himself Anarcho-Capitalist. Those terms are just as incompatible with each other. This is not a hard point to understand. You’re just stuck trying to endlessly massage this appeal to authority to make it work. it’s still inane.
And yes, I took your referral to “on authority” as an authoritative text and wanted to point out and laugh. You didn’t have to do that, you could just say “yes Engels was an authoritarian”, but you did, so I laughed.