this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)

Asklemmy

43847 readers
696 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've been trying to find a good Marxist instance, but Lemmygrad and Hexbear are widely hated. Why is that? Are there any good leftist instances?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Here are some properties of any conspiracy theory worth it’s name:

  • Closed Ideological Systems: They provide an all-encompassing explanation for various events or states, with everything fitting into their worldview.
  • Immunity to Facts: Any contrary evidence is dismissed as false or considered part of the conspiracy.
  • Enemy Construction: They tend to draw a clear line between "us" (those who "know the truth") and "them" (the supposed conspirators).
  • Adaptability: Conspiracy narratives can change and incorporate new "evidence" or events to maintain their credibility.

It matches for QAnon and the MAGA crowd as well as the lemmygrad crowd.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

How ironic! Let's see if it fits for the "genocide" position:

  • Closed Ideological Systems: Whether those who defend the idea of "genocide" in Xinjiang are aware or not, the sources used to claim there is a genocide in Xinjiang is usually Adrian Zenz, a German white supremacist and Christian fundamentalist who claimed in his book Worthy to Escape that "other belief systems are ultimately inspired by Satan” and justifies β€œeternal punishment" for those who refuse to believe in Jesus.

  • Immunity to Facts: Every time one tries to argue that Xinjiang faced a policy of de-radicalization of terrorists who led many attacks against the province, those who claim there is a genocide there say they are "genocide deniers." I've even seen people saying those who don't agree with the "genocide" position are paid by the Chinese.

  • Enemy Construction: I can't even count the number of times people have called those who don't promote the "genocide" propaganda "tankies" and dismissing them instead of engaging with arguments.

  • Adaptability: The "genocide" propaganda claims there is a genocide there, and then when presented with the fact that even those who were put in the re-education facilities were allowed to express their culture with dances and art on video, the "genocide" conspiracy theorists say that it was a fake, an act, that it was a spectacle organized by the Chinese to hide the genocide. Just to give you an example.

It does match the "genocide" position very well. I've yet to see a genocide which preserves the language, the culture, the customs and the places of worship of a people. Another thing, notice the reaction of Muslim countries to the actual genocide being perpetrated by Israel. They are firmly condemning it through all channels. In contrast, the policies of de-radicalization by the Chinese were unanimously well-received by Muslim countries.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Another thing, notice the reaction of Muslim countries to the actual genocide being perpetrated by Israel. They are firmly condemning it through all channels. In contrast, the policies of de-radicalization by the Chinese were unanimously well-received by Muslim countries.

Very generous of you to assume that many of these folk believe Muslims and Arabs are human beings capable of forming their own opinions and international policy. The opinions of actual Muslims are similarly handwaved akin to any communist's opinion.

These states' international defense of China's de-radicalization program is stated to merely be because they are money-hungry opportunists, buddying up with China while ignoring a politically and economically inconvenient genocide. πŸ™„ How... adaptable this narrative is.

The seemingly unending wave of videos of Uyghurs in China recording themselves in their homes and making it clear they are not undergoing genocide have to be ignored. In fact, they have to be deleted by the platforms hosting them. How utterly immune to facts this narrative is.

If these countries care about Palestine, oh... I don't know. Russia is making them care. Iran, maybe? Maybe North Korea or China are forcing these Muslims to hate Israel. Who else are we being directed to hate right now? Afghanistan? Just throw a dart at the "Axis of Evil" board and pick an "uncivilized" nation. It's their fault. Why not?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

not having the self awareness to realize this applies to anti-communists, not communists/MLs as they use scientific reasoning.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Just to understand what you are saying, do you say communists apply scientific reasoning?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Yes, the foundation of most communists reasoning is based on sociology.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

That's very abstract and doesn't mean much. With as many words you can say capitalism is based on scientific reasoning.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Its not abstract at all, 'Marxism' is an entire field in sociology and is recongised + fundemental to understanding sociology.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 11 months ago

Marx was the third ever sociologist, the first being Weber and the second I always forget his name. But this is historically attested to, it's not something I just pulled out of my ass lol