Update:
The comments from this post will not be removed as to preserve the discussion around the announcement. Any continued discussions outside of this thread that violate server rules will be removed. We feel that everyone that has an opinion, and wanted to vent, has been heard.
————-
Original post:
Yesterday, we received information about the planned federation by Hexbear. The announcement thread can be found here: https://www.hexbear.net/post/280770. After reviewing the thread and the comments, it became evident that allowing Hexbear to federate would violate our rules.
Our code of conduct and server rules can be found here.
The announcement included several concerning statements, as highlighted below:
- “Please try to keep the dirtbag lib-dunking to hexbear itself. Do not follow the Chapo Rules of Posting, instead try to engage utilizing informed rhetoric with sources to dismantle western propaganda. Posting the western atrocity propaganda and pig poop balls is hilarious but will pretty quickly get you banned and if enough of us do it defederated.”
- “The West's role in the world, through organizations such as NATO, the IMF, and the World Bank - among many others - are deeply harmful to the billions of people living both inside and outside of their imperial core.”
- “These organizations constitute the modern imperial order, with the United States at its heart - we are not fooled by the term "rules-based international order." It is in the Left's interest for these organizations to be demolished. When and how this will occur, and what precisely comes after, is the cause of great debate and discussion on this site, but it is necessary for a better world.”
The rhetoric and goal of Hexbar are clear based on their announcement: to "dismantle western propaganda" and "demolish organizations such as NATO” shows that Hexbar has no intention of "respecting the rules of the community instance in which they are posting/commenting.” It’s to push their beliefs and ideology.
In addition, several comments from a Hexbear admin, demonstrate that instance rules will not be respected.
Here are some examples:
“I can assure you there will be no lemmygrad brigades, that energy would be better funneled into the current war against liberalism on the wider fediverse.”
“All loyal, honest, active and upright Communists must unite to oppose the liberal tendencies shown by certain people among us, and set them on the right path. This is one of the tasks on our ideological front.”
- https://lemmy.world/comment/121850
- https://lemmy.world/comment/1487168
- https://lemmy.world/comment/1476084
- https://lemmy.world/comment/171595
- https://www.hexbear.net/comment/3648500
Overall community comments:
- https://www.hexbear.net/comment/3526128
- https://www.hexbear.net/comment/3526086
- https://www.hexbear.net/comment/3652828
To clarify, for those who have inquired about why Hexbear versus Lemmygrad, it should be noted that we are currently exploring the possibility of defederating from Lemmygrad as well based on similar comments Hexbear has made.
- https://lemmygrad.ml/post/158656
- https://lemmygrad.ml/comment/882559
- https://lemmygrad.ml/comment/540170
- https://lemmygrad.ml/comment/446529
Defederation should only be considered as a last resort. However, based on their comments and behavior, no positive outcomes can be expected.
We made the decision to preemptively defederate from Hexbear for these reasons. While we understand that not everyone may agree with our decision, we believe it is important to prioritize the best interests of our community.
Because "critical of western propaganda" is a front for promoting authorianism and intolerance. The "western propaganda" they're critical of include human rights, inclusiveness, social security etc.
This is what I find absolutely crazy. I am, by and large, in agreement with socialists on economic matters. But why do they always support China and Russia? Like wtf? In what world is the genocide being committed against the Uyghur people cool? In what world is banning access to free communication including many of the largest websites worth defending? Why is it ok to lock up gay people? How is aggressively invading a neighbouring country cool? How is threatening to invade a neighbouring independent country (which has been de facto independent for over 70 years) whilst frequently flying your military into their airspace as a form of threat somehow the actions of the good guys?
You can believe in socialist economics without needing to defend the extreme authoritarian nature of countries that pretend as though their economy runs on socialist principles (or worse, which are the explicitly non-socialist successor state to a country that formerly professed to socialism). Tankies make no fucking sense to me.
I just want to say that most communists/socialists are not in favor of china or other authoritarian “communist” regimes (any country where factories need suicide nets can hardly be called communist, even if you disregard all the other ways they fail at communist ideals).
Unfortunately tankies are incredibly loud and often well-organized. They are just authoritarian dickriders, no better than the imperialist they claim to oppose.
Communists practice critical support. To quote Marx, “Communism is for us not a state of affairs which is to be established, an ideal to which reality [will] have to adjust itself. We call communism the real movement which abolishes the present state of things. The conditions of this movement result from the premises now in existence.” We do not believe China’s economy is socialist. But the CPC has lifted more people out of poverty than any government in history, at the same time that living standards for the Western working class have collapsed. In so far as they support the working class, we critically support the CPC.
What you call ‘Tankies’, is a word that has been used to associate Marxist-Leninist’s with all kinds of bizarre micro-ideologies. But Marxism-Leninism is the primary form of communism in most countries in the world, and in that sense most communists will practice critical support towards AES states.
Exactly this. Even the CPC doesn't claim to have achieved socialism yet. They don't plan to achieve it till ~2050 (although seeing how they smash all other targets, they might get there a bit sooner).
I can agree that getting people out of poverty is cool. But tankies generally don't practice "critical support" of CPC. They practice unwavering boot-deepthroating. I have never heard anyone from that side of the left say (or acknowledge) anything negative about CPC. Any critiques put up is usually dismissed as "CIA propaganda".
There are a wide range of views towards China among communist and amongst ourselves we argue about them a lot. The thing is, a lot of the criticisms of China that the average Westerner has, are naturally informed by the Western media. This is understandable, but it leads to criticisms that often aren’t based in reality. I don’t know how many times I’ve had someone tell me, for example, that China is a warmongering, imperialist state, when in reality they haven’t been in a war for more than half a century. So this creates the idea among non-communists that we are aligned and have a unified, uncritical front in regard to China, whereas actually nothing could be further from the truth.
Echoing/adding to Tabitha's point, it gets tedious very quickly to argue with liberals about China because they're rarely well informed.
Marxism stands for the 'ruthless criticism of all that exists' and the 'concrete analysis of concrete conditions'. China does not get a free pass. But it's not very productive to argue with someone who isn't concerned with material reality in China because they've been led to believe falsehoods spread by liberals.
One of the reasons you don't see the critical side to the 'tankie' analysis of China is because you might never have got to the point where you're talking about China (as opposed to what westerners think about China).
If the 'tankie' has to debunk a blatant lie for the millionth time, a constructive conversation cannot follow unless the liberal is willing to move past that point. The liberal must first accept that they might be wrong and then continue the discussion beyond where it usually ends—which is usually where the liberal accuses the 'tankie' of arguing in bad faith for daring to investigate an issue beyond the headline.
(Again, to caveat this, by liberal, I mean pro-capitalists, not the 'progressive' liberals of the US.)
are in China and the rest of the global south.
What passes for socialism/the 'left' in the US/west is 'progressive' liberalism. I encourage you to read the classic and modern texts of liberalism with a critical eye. Then read Marx.
Otherwise, you could start with Zac Cope (critical of China/Marxism-Leninism).
China lifted hundreds of millions of people from poverty in one generation. This is pretty impressive.
You can do good things and bad things at the same time. What I find funny is people complaining about censorship and at the same time support states like Russia and China, their extreme censorship goes hand in hand with the authoritarian rule.
Censorship in China does not have an impact on my life, or on the life of most people here. Let the Chinese people be the judge of what happens in China.
On the other hand, censorship here matters a lot to us.
What do you mean by socialist economics?
You'll be hard pressed to find anyone on Hexbear (or Lemmygrad for that matter) who 'supports Russia' or thinks it's 'ok to lock up gay people'. In fact, it's the exact opposite. If you read Hexbear's Code of Conduct, any kind of bigotry will result in a ban: https://www.hexbear.net/code_of_conduct
Socialist covers a pretty wide swath of political ideologies. Some of them buy into the old propaganda that Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Xi, etc, were actually on the right track, and that we can only achieve some sort of utopia with extreme authoritarianism first. They're generally no better than people on the right who fall into the Trump cult of personality. There's a lot of denial on both sides.
The type of Socialists that are generally more sane and denounce those dictators for the monsters they were are the the Libertarian-Left ideologies, like Anarchists.
This is a gross mischaracterisation. Please read Socialism: Utopian and Scientific by Engels. This is the basis of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Xi, etc's thought: all these figures are Marxist-Leninists, who reject the idea of utopia. Everything is contradiction. The Marxism you refer to, which is mainly Marxism-Leninism, is not teleological.
This is the real reason why Hexbear cannot be federated.
There has been a large push to redefine Marxists Leninists as ‘Tankies’. They are this associated with bizarre, reactionary micro-ideologies, uninformed cliches about supporting Russia, etc.
Any interaction with hexbear users would quickly dispel such ideas.
Communists do not ‘support’ Russia, - the Russian oligarchic state represents everything they despise. But these are people who are highly engaged with politics. And their worldview is a lot more nuanced than the average person, who doesn’t have any particular interest in politics and so will only pickup the general gist of mainstream narratives, and accept them without much criticism.
So for example, in relation to Russia, while Marxists do not support their war in Ukraine, they do recognise that Russia was baited into that war by the West, and by a Ukranian state that was captured by a minority of far-right fascists following the Maiden revolution. That is geopolitical realism, and has nothing to do with ideology. No Marxist supports the economic system or cultural bigotry of modern Russia.
Socialism naturally aligns with the humanist value systems that most people hold, and which Western countries claim to uphold even as their actions contradict them. It is essential for those who would uphold the status quo to shut out socialist voices and paint them as extremists. Your confusion - ‘why would people who extol equality and tolerance support inequality and intolerance?’ - is really answering your own question. They don’t.
Far from all socialists are tankies but yeah, tankies are a maddening bunch of hypocrites for sure!
Every fucking "social security" that exists in the western world was achieved by those of us that wave the red flag ffs. 5 day week? Socialists. Most of your holidays? Socialists. Worker protections? Socialists. The length of your work day? Socialists. Healthcare? Socialists. Eliminating child labour? Socialists. The list goes on and on and on.
And inclusiveness? How the fuck do you work out that the only lemmy that has visible pronouns is not inclusive? 20-30% of the userbase is trans ffs. It's MORE inclusive that this instance which has left transphobic and hateful posts up for many hours at a time on occasion. The post that looked like a relic from r/fatpeoplehate was up for 12 hours before it got taken down.
A prominent example you left out: American politicians and the billionaire-owned media don't like when someone brings it up, but the man who more than anyone else has been hailed by the establishment as the embodiment of peaceful struggle for civil rights, Martin Luther King Jr, was a pro-union socialist and would have been as disgusted by the neoliberal hypocrites in charge of the Dems as the blatant racists of the far right
There's a user down in the comments with a history of transphobic garbage bragging about not having been banned yet. Liberal inclusivity.
ffs
Which union movements led to the implementation of those policies and who were the prominent leaders of the unions in those movements? Maybe look into whose blood was spilled in the streets fighting for it too.
Linking to a wikipedia page and vaguely gesturing is functionally meaningless.
Maybe look up the International Workingmen's Association, and the 8 hour day movement, which followed the Nine Hours Movement of 1871–72. Or read a little about where the weekend comes from.
The welfare state was a response to the militant labor movement that had already won most of those concessions for their own members and were threatening to do a lot more. This dovetailed with a need to counter the very real welfare state pioneeted by the Soviets decades earlier.
An easy place to begin informing yourself is to read up on FDR and where his motivations for The New Deal came from, and who he wanted to defang.
The society that spent the last 20 years in a murder spree in the Middle East does not get to lecture anyone about intolerance.
How many countries has America invaded in your lifetime? How many murders have American thugs committed?
Which Soviet overloards? There never was Soviet rule in my country. Stop talking nonsense.
Like defederating from an instance whose user-base appears to have different views to one's own.
You won't find a single leftist who doesn't argue vociferously for these things. It is the essence of being a leftist. It's what unites them even when they disagree theoretically about the exact root of a problem and of how to uphold them. What they criticise is the idea that these things are possible under capitalism. Any cursory—critical—reading of human rights literature or liberal theory will reveal this. What you're missing, if this is your interpretation of radical thought, is class analysis. If you are interested in the contradiction between capitalism and inclusivity, you could start with Marta Russell, Capitalism and Disability: Selected Writings.
In this context, where the discussion is about Hexbear, you only have to read their Code of Conduct: https://www.hexbear.net/code_of_conduct:
Yeah, you're thinking of (and listening to, by the looks of it) western propaganda institutions such as the John Birch Society, the Republican Party and the Democratic Party neoliberal leadership 🙄
The authority of the working class and intolersnce for Nazis, sure.
Re: human rights, inclusiveness, and social security: bullshit. Not even on the same planet at those who bring skepticism towards hegemonic propaganda narratives, and particularly from a socialist perspective, i.e. the preemptively banned instance.
lmao
Western countries, famous for loving social security.
Yes, as "western countries" famously is not just the US.
Let me guess, your examples are Finland and Sweden, two countries that have been gradually dismantling their welfare states for decades?
Every European country has social security
Achieved by the ideology of the very people you're currently suppressing. All you're doing is moving this community hard-right, alienating the left by saying "this is not for you".
How do you think this discussion is gonna go down every single time this community ever gets linked anywhere now? It's gonna be "the community that banned socialists" and it's gonna attract the neoliberals and the far right as a result while ensuring everyone that leans remotely left says "oh, fuck that then". It's a completely shortsighted move for the future of the instance. It's going to have nazi bar syndrome.
As soon as we had that PM where you said "survival of the fittest" to me I knew something was up. You literally quoted Thatcherite/Ayn Randian philosophy to justify selectively not intervening in name squatting and community theft, a move that completely fucked over this instance's potential to work with any subreddit modteams in further hastening the reddit migration. Livid that I was led on by this place to begin with.
Is that the best you've got? Systems that have been "gradually dismantled for decades" but still provide a higher quality of life for their citizens than not just the US but every single authoritarian government. Also the list is a lot bigger than two countries.
Do you practice being this stupid or does it come naturally?
I mean, that's the best the West has got. Everywhere else, social security is considerably worse and means-tested. Plus, both have got right-wing governments that aren't exactly fans of social security: the last right-wing Finnish government introduced an ”activation” system for unemployment which was so bureaucratic a lot of people's benefits were cut for not being able to jump through arbitary hoops, and they're bringing a similar system back, as well as cutting many, more focused benefits. What @Lenins2ndCat@lemmy.world said also applies here, since the whole welfare state only exists due to the CIA funding social democrats during the Cold War as a counter to socialism.
There's many more factors to consider than whether or not a country is AuThOrItArIaN. A country living off the backs of the global south can give its citizens a better standard of living than countries in the global south? Surprised Pikachu.