Incase anyone tells you that lemmy.ml is not a tankie instance.
this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2024
1 points (100.0% liked)
MeanwhileOnGrad
1260 readers
3 users here now
"Oh, this is calamity! Calamity! Oh no, he's on the floor!"
Welcome to MoG!
Meanwhile On Grad
Documenting hate-speech, conspiracy theories, apologia/revisionism, and general tankie behaviour across the fediverse
What is a Tankie?
Alternatively, a detailed blog post about Tankies.
(caution of bias)
Basic Rules:
Sh.itjust.works Instance rules apply! If you are from other instances, please be mindful of the rules. — Basically, don't be a dick.
Hate-Speech — You should be familiar with this one already; practically all instances have the same rules on hate speech.
Apologia — (Using the Modern terminology for Apologia) No Defending, Denying, Justifying, Bolstering, or Differentiating authoritarian acts or endeavours, whether be a Pro-CCP viewpoint, Stalinism or any variation of Tankie Ideology. There is no justifying Genocide.
Revisionism — Downplaying or denying atrocities past and present will result in an immediate ban.
If you're violating instance rules, you'll typically be warned. Continuing poor behaviour after being warned will result in a ban or removal of your comments. Bans typically only last seven days, but repeat infractions will have longer sentences. You may ask to be unbanned.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Lmao of course this place is ran by hardcore war crime apologist PugJesus who advocates for jailing Edward Snowden and Julian Assagne.
Link?
https://lemmy.world/comment/12021907
Sorry, but nothing in there even mentions jail, Assagne, or war crimes.
What do you think it means to not pardon someone? It means jail.
In Snowden's case not really. Him not getting pardoned just means he remains in exile. And I'm not even seeing anything in explicit support of that.
You wanna post a screenshot where they say those people should be jailed?
Apparently thinking that Ed Snowden has better PR than intentions is a violation of dogma.
Maybe people who hold power are all conniving bastards to some degree, and all of them should have their dirty laundry aired.
Makes me think lemmy tankies can't admit even their saints are flawed humans, too, because that'd mean they could never become perfect and can't bear ever being wrong.
Please don't air my dirty laundry 🥺
Joking aside, I have two primary problems with Snowden.
His leaks were not just of the moral variety, but also exposed US spycraft. That's... not great.
I would have been much more convinced of his idealism, even as a change of heart from his prior opinions, had he gone somewhere other than fucking Russia. You expect me to believe you're too moral to stand by while the US spies on its own people, and then go and settle quietly under Putin's regime? Moron, hypocrite, or actual authoritarian scumbag, it doesn't matter to me at this point. I have no desire to see him jailed at this point, but he's no hero to my eyes.
I'm pretty sure Snowden is very opposed to Putin and everything the Kremlin does. He knew he'd be safe there. It was a smart move, evidenced by the fact that over a decade later, the world's richest government hasn't arrested him. Do you agree with the politics of your country's leaders? I certainly don't, but that doesn't make me immoral for living here.
Ah, is that why he was pushing the "Ukrainian invasion is a Western psyop" line before February 24?
There are any number of countries without extradition treaties with the US, and many that have treaties and regularly refuse. Choosing the worst of them, a fascist state? Doesn't look too good.
I'm not aware of that. Source? I was looking for something about this and all I found was an article saying he should speak up about the war. Which seems to ignore the difficult position he's in where he can get murdered by the Kremlin easily. We know this happens in Russia all the time. Even despite that, from the article:
Also, you're actually suggesting he was aligned with Russia from the beginning and that's why he went there?
https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2022/12/18/the-trouble-with-edward-snowden
https://www.benzinga.com/news/22/10/29391138/edward-snowden-criticized-by-black-swan-author-for-describing-putins-invasion-of-ukraine-as-fighting
https://news.cgtn.com/news/2022-02-16/Snowden-questions-veracity-of-reports-about-invasion-of-Ukraine-17GQHqbF3NK/index.html
No, I'm suggesting he doesn't have principles.
Okay second link is some author taunting Snowden about his tricky position in Russia which is essentially meaningless. Third link is a trash website pushing their app with basically only this content:
I actually find it baffling that essentially we have "at one point doubted an invasion would happen" and "exists in Russia" to hate a guy, especially who did what he did.
I believe now that I think about it, I do remember him backpedaling about the quote above and saying he was wrong.
Wow, it's amazing that in the US he was a hero, but now that he's in Russia it's a 'tricky situation'.
The US at the time came with receipts. It was blatantly obvious at the time. Snowden continued simping for the fascists. And he always will.
Oh, okay, so it's okay to call it a CIA psyop if, after it's apparent that it's not even to the staunchest defenders of the conspiracy, you admit that it's not. Of course. Like denying that Nazi Germany is going to invade Czechoslovakia, and then admitting, once the Nazis invade Czechoslovakia, that they invaded Czechoslovakia. Quite clearly this means you are, deep down, a good fellow who definitely isn't obfuscating in service of a fascist state. Or a useful idiot, if you feel generous about his motives.
Why are you so combative about this? I read three articles and in not one did he say anything overt (he can't if he wants to live, and he can't leave to somewhere where he can speak openly) or use language at all equivalent to a "CIA psyop". Let's just leave this conversation here. You obviously loathe a person I respect a great deal and this isn't going anywhere good.
Except for the part where he was denying Russia's imminent intent to invade Ukraine. Funny that when he's defending Russia he can be overt, but when criticizing it, he can't. But yes, I'm sure he's a very heroic man with great principles. Definitely not a libertarian dipshit with the usual conflicting opinions depending on whether the administration is seen as liberal or not. He called for whistleblowers to be killed, and then became one.
...... Okay, but you're still wrong. People have horrible political views and say stupid shit in their early twenties. And when they live in authoritarian countries they'd rather not live in, they can't criticize their governments. Jesus fucking Christ.
Oh, okay, so if I brought proof that he was still a libertarian dipshit now, you'd believe me? Or is it "He was a libertarian dipshit then, but now he's just saying the same things they are"?
When they flee to authoritarian countries with countless other options on the table, you mean.
Oh, okay, so risking punishment in the US was fine, but risking punishment in Russia is too far for him. Very convenient level of bravery, the perfect medium. There are ordinary Russians even now who continue to openly criticize the government, but I guess Snowden just isn't as brave as them. Very very curious level of bravery.
You haven't brought that proof. He isn't saying the same things they are. You would have zero way of knowing what his exact situation was and where he could go, he had literal minutes to make his plan, and I have no fucking clue what point you think you're making by comparing a country he literally has no choice but to stay in, that everyone "falls out of windows" in all the time, to a country he could definitely leave, maybe make better, and had an idea how to escape from. Wtf ?
Also man, your tone is incredibly condescending. And since you're a mod, I'm just waiting for you to ban me everywhere you can.
You're so far only convinced me that A) you think a lot about how much you despise Snowden, someone I've considered a hero for a decade and B) you don't respect me at all.
So awesome, great talk. If I'm not banned before I can hit submit.
Minutes to make his plan.
Are you going to keep to this? Because I can give you quite the outline of Snowden's actions leading up to him fleeing the country, and 'minutes to make a plan' is not included in that.
"He did something that was beneficial. This does not make him a good person. It does not make him brave. It certainly doesn't make him wise. He's a cowardly dipshit who is now supporting a fascist regime."
I don't ban people for disagreeing with me. And certainly not in any place they hadn't broken the rules in.
Yep, I reconsidered the issue in-depth after the Ukrainian War began.
It's the internet, man. You're words on a screen putting forth shitty arguments. Tomorrow you may be putting forward good arguments; tomorrow you may be putting forth bad arguments. I take things as they come.
Yeah, it is quite clear that is how you're treating this. Text, conveying awful evil ideas from a faceless enemy without feelings or a soul. I gotta go.
Yeah, I'm not here to discuss politics from the point of "How does the other person feel about my criticism of a third party whose behavior influences more people than you or I will ever even speak to?" but "Is this correct or incorrect? Is this moral or immoral? Is this a valid argument, or invalid?"
I honestly used to believe humanity had a chance. Between the trump era and seeing people behave poorly all the time, I just don't have that hope anymore. I don't know how to explain it, and it doesn't seem like you'd care in any case, but this conversation is a not small part of increasing that hopelessness. For a year I've been reading your posts and comments and largely agreeing and feeling a sense of alignment. But the second there isn't agreement, boom, a feeling of instant enemies.
You aren't here to care about feelings.. alright. Generally though I think society benefits if more people think humanity has a shot.
I'm sorry you feel that way. I don't regard you as an enemy, and I can show receipts on the kind of vitriol I shower on people whom I actively dislike - it's not like this. This was just a heated argument over an issue two people feel strongly about. They happen.
I appreciate you taking this feedback somewhat well. The way you wrote is like how I would write to a full on fascist. I would suggest reconsidering your tone in situations like this.
Well, I apologize. It's not the first time my aggressive tone has been... more hostile than it's meant. I like to hammer points hard to ensure there's no 'way out' of the counter-argument that could be brushed off, like ambiguity or a lack of severity, but the bitterness and sarcasm employed sometimes makes it sound accusatory towards the arguer and not the point, though that's not how it's meant.
I mean, more hostile than it's meant towards someone I'm not trying to be hostile towards. Obviously I cut the brakes when I want to be hostile because I'm dealing with a fascist or like cretin.
I appreciate the apology and the willingness to reflect. See you around.
You should save the vitriol for people who literally are your enemy
Man, if you feel I'm being vitriolic towards you, I can assure you, I don't feel like you're a bad person for holding the view that you do. You aren't coming from a position of "Fascism is good, so Snowden is good", you're just denying what I see as a fairly plain interpretation of the events. I don't think you're a dipshit or a fascist like I think of some other people who've put forth bad arguments. I think you just hold a bad viewpoint on this particular issue. We all do sometimes.
I think that the issue of Snowden is a relatively important one. I do hold plenty of vitriol for Snowden, but he's not here, in this conversation, so his feelings are a nonissue here even if you think they're important. He's not likely to be on Lemmy browsing neck-deep in a comment thread. He'll live.
...you just reposted the quote I gave you implying he doesn't support that war and wishes he could actually say it more bluntly. And the first link I mostly read and found nothing like what you wrote about it being a "psyop".
Fleeing life in prison or execution in a hurry doesn't determine one's principles. I find that a weird claim.
I will look at the other links but so far this has been...disappointing.
Snowden essentially sacrificed his freedom to show that the US government is spying on its citizens. If anything were to imply principles, that would be it.
No, I highlighted the part of your quote in which he implied that the war was not imminent and that anyone who 'understands the conflict' at a time when America was warning of the oncoming invasion, would understand that Russia had no desire to invade Ukraine as a means of resolution of the ongoing political dispute.
From one of my other links
So if I expose, say, Britain's wrongdoings in World War 2, and flee to Nazi Germany, do I have:
A. Principles
B. No Principles
Cowardice is not a principle.
Of course, that assumes a choice between two countries, as stated before, large swathes of the world don't have extradition treaties with the US, yet he just happened to choose (with the help of Assange) the fascist state.
Very curious.
"He did something I like, so he has principles"
He pissed off to a cushy position in Russia where he gets constant asspats from the terminally online while lending credibility to a fascist regime. Principles are not high on his list of priorities, quite apparently.
You're really going to compare this Nazi Germany..? Yikes.
I have read and agreed with many things you've written but you're just wrong about this one. Doesn't seem you're open to challenging your view though, so that's fine.
... you're really going to say modern Russia, a brutal totalitarian state, invading a neighboring sovereign state unprovoked and performing genocide isn't comparable to Nazi Germany?
... really?
When I wrote this, I was hoping it would make you realize I'm not your enemy, that we could have a better conversation. I wish I'd been right.
The war started in 2014, he went to Russia in 2013 and obviously hasn't been in a position to leave. Hate me if you want but you're just wrong about this.
I'm sorry, do I have to outline the numerous actions of Russia in and before 2013 that made it quite clear they were a fascist state? "He went to Nazi Germany before it invaded Czechoslovakia" is not the excuse you think it is.
"He did something out of desperation" is not the moral statement you think it is. This is a rage boner for the ages
"He went to Nazi Germany out of desperation, when he had numerous other choices that weren't Nazi Germany" is a moral statement. Or rather, a statement of lack of morals.
I hated him much less before the Ukraine War started. I was willing to accept that he had just made a dumb decision, and that he was just a coward for lending credibility to the fascist government he was under. After his comments and constant dodges on the Ukrainian War? I interpret his motivations in a much more negative light.
Why are you like this? I feel emptier inside after having read this.
You feel emptier after having read someone criticize someone you've never met for choosing to flee to a fascist regime, support that fascist regime's talking points during an ongoing genocide, and still get hailed as a hero by some corners of the internet?
I think you're taking this altogether too personally.
I feel emptier because of the horrifying tone and the complete lack of awareness of it