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
1337 readers
13 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. Memes are welcome!
What is a Tankie?
Alternatively, a detailed blog post about Tankies.
(caution of biased source)
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, Islamic Terrorism or any variation of Tankie Ideology.
Revisionism — No downplaying or denying atrocities past and present. Calling Tankies shills, foreign/federal agents, or bots also falls under this rule. Extremists exist. They are real. Do not call them shills or fake users as it handwaves their extremism.
Tankies can explain their views but may be criticised or attacked for them. Any slight infraction on the rules above will immediately earn a warning and possibly a ban.
Off-topic Discussion — Do not discuss unrelated topics to the point of derailing the thread. Stay focused on the direct content of the post as opposed to arguing.
You'll be warned if you're violating the instance and community rules. Continuing poor behaviour after being warned will result in a ban or removal of your comments. Bans typically only last 24 hours, but each subsequent infraction will double the amount. Depending on the content, the ban time may be increased. You may request an unban at any time.
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
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.