Silencing discussion of human rights violations implies tacit support for the action, so I guess we know now where .ml stands. Any claim of leftist ideology on their part is a sham, they just have a hard-on for authoritarians.

[–] Womble@lemmy.world 26 points 5 days ago* (last edited 5 days ago) (1 children)

Of course its political, what else would it be? You are talking about peoples rights (a political concept) being breached by an administration (poltical) using an arm of the government (political) as a paramilitary force (political).

[–] NaibofTabr@infosec.pub 1 points 5 days ago (1 children)

My point of view is that a human rights violation is a human rights violation regardless of the context in which it happens, and is therefore an important thing to discuss and give visibility to.

Labeling it as "political" and using that as an excuse to hide discussion of it feels like bootlicker behavior to me.

[–] Womble@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago

Obviously its important, but pretending its not political doesnt make any sense. If a community doesnt want to discuss politics (and as far as I've seen the OP didnt say which community this was in) then its a reasonable post to remove.