lmao

In the 3 years Hexbear has been around it has been attacked A LOT because obviously far right chuds have an interest in messing with leftists but has not to my knowledge had an admin breach. At one point image embeds were completely disabled because they were handing over data they shouldn’t though and risked exposing people to doxxing.

I have not said you should not support the ukrainian people. The problem is that you do not, you are nationalists that support the ukrainian state, not the lives of human beings. They are two quite separate things.

Oh wow this thread goes way back. I know what happened here it wasn’t defederation but simply Beehaw doing it’s ideological thing. I was banned on their instance because I am a socialist much like every other socialist that makes an account here and attempts to post or comment over there.

They alos claim they only defederate for “hate speech” but this is nonsense. They have Hexbear defederated and yet that is the only instance in the entire fediverse with visible pronouns next to usernames, and they crack down far harder on hate speech than any other instance that exists.

The reality of Beehaw is that they are an ideologically motivated neoliberal instance that repress any opposition while pretending that they do not.

EDIT: OH and the irony of their defederation with Hexbear is that it’s not even federated with ANYONE as it was using a fork of Lemmy without federation until very recently.

What was?

Ah man. I’m not sure where I did that this time. Tell me what’s grated you and I’ll take it back. I thought I gave you a pretty explanatory response.

Is it because I keep calling american liberals right wing? I thought the last portion of my comment explained quite well what a real left looks like, that’s our left, those are our luke-warm mainstream folks with their socdem policies of welfare capitalism saying all the things that would get you called a tankie on reddit. That’s the soft-left of the UK, not even the hard-left.

i’m not particularly interested in unpacking the psychology of Putin

We’ve swapped from discussing the actual concept of power, factions and influential forces that lead to a country going in one direction or another to “putin”.

Do you think that this war would not have happened if a different leader existed? Which politician in United Russia would not have started this war? Which politician in the communist party? Anyone?

Get past the idea that this war was caused by one man. There are material causes and forces at work that go beyond that. Once you get past that then you can start to understand how and why things happen, something that is extremely useful in avoiding its outcome next time - something I absolutely want to see happen but also something I am not sure americans are capable of given that you’ve supported every single forever war america has ever engaged in.

and if "Stirring the pot remains your intention rather than calm, rational discourse, I suggest you try antagonizing someone else.

Hmmm I do have a somewhat constructive motivation, I’m trying to change the context a little. One thing I’ve found with my interactions on reddit is that americans don’t tend to have an understanding of the left at all, given that the democrats are to the right of our right-wing. A lot of them say things like they want a nice welfare state but have no understanding of how radical the left has to be in order to achieve one, or to defend its existence. Jeremy Corbyn defends the USSR publicly and loudly. Diane Abbot has defended Mao on national TV. John McDonald publicly states “it is my job to overthrow capitalism”. Frankie Boyle says we shouldn’t be violent, we shouldn’t do anything illegal, instead we should make it legal to kill all the capitalists, on national TV with the BBC funded by the taxpayer. My point in stirring a bit is to draw a little more attention to the culture differences we have. Because Americans often seem to mistakenly think they have a left when they don’t, and I’ve found that drawing attention to these significant baseline differences sometimes inspires a bit more curiosity in american liberals to understand it.

And the point of answering why it happened is because it is a necessary component of finding the solution.

Let’s try this instead, so that we’re not focused on me and we’re in an area that’s a bit more constructive: Why do you think the war happened? What caused it?

I don’t think I’ve insulted liberals that much here but for the sake of stirring the pot this is the general sentiment toward them in my city: It might help some culture differences going on here.

Let’s keep it calm yeah? Keep in mind that nothing either of us do or say here matters and there is zero need for it to get emotional. There’s no need whatsoever for this to turn nasty and it’d be a shame if it did.

edit: something that has always fascinated me is how someone could so ardently claim to be a “Marxist” while going to such lengths to defend the actions of an oligarchic autarch of a strictly capitalist and fascist country.

Nobody has said that. However calling it a fascist country is just a complete misunderstanding of fascism. There is a faction of fascists in Russia, Navalny being a core figure among them. Putin and his faction are authoritarians, deeply unpleasant people, but fascists they are not and misusing the word is misguided. We should use it accurately.

I’ve also not defended them. I’ve said what the left’s interpretation of the causes of this war are. You’ve turned that into “defender of russia” yourself. I can assure you that I and none of the other people I reeled off on that list are fans of the russian state. I want an end to the war, and I didn’t want a state to it either. The difference between our factions is that liberals seem to think more guns and more bombs end wars, whereas socialists do not.

well, when the fact that the illegal Russian invasion of Ukraine is what started the war is what’s inconvenient, that’s when “narratives” and “interpretations” assert themselves to deflect blame and cast aspersions upon others who some happen not to like for whatever reason.

You’re doing the “narrative” here. You can’t stop yourself from talking like a deeply propagandised individual, this phrase “illegal Russian invasion of Ukraine” is not how normal people talk, it’s precisely the language used to set a narrative, and is repeated over and over and over and over in liberal media as part of media collaboration with western interests to set this as the official line of the west and deeply engrain it in its populations. With that said this is a particularly american turn of phrase and is not one used in Europe after the pushback against it succeeded, resulting in at least a little more nuance in our regional politics on the matter.

It, however, doesn’t change the facts of the matter, regardless of how many straw men, ad hominem, whataboutisms, or other logical fallacies get bandied about.

That Russia invaded? Yes certainly. But without the context, without understanding the forces in play, without understanding the influences and the historical context you can’t tell me WHY russia invaded. And that’s the thing here. The liberal explanation of why is just “Because Putin grrrrr, conqueror!”, which is I think something you must agree is not really an adequate or academic explanation.

It’s completely a matter of interpretation and narratives. The western community has one that serves their interests while Russia has one that serves their interests. Meanwhile the left has a completely different one that recognises the military industrial complex of america profiting off of its new forever war while millions of innocents are sent to their deaths.

You subscribe to the liberal one. That’s fine. I do not.

I suspect our opinions differ on what “sovereign” actually is here too. I don’t consider much of Europe to be particularly sovereign, but instead to be vassal states of US empire referred to colloquially by the american media as “the international community”, a funny name given that it excludes 2 thirds of the world. We probably differ on that opinion as well though.

that’s an… interesting viewpoint, and, as a “Westerner”, i see little evidence to support this narrative aside from some Western think tanks both existing and, perhaps thinking what you propose.

You only need to look at (very small) sample of the attendees of the Atlantic Council’s meetings to see that it is directly responsible for a huge amount of policy. These people aren’t attending for a laugh, they attend because they know its power and have the same interests and goals as the organisation.

Understanding the role of these organisations in the wider net of actors is a fundamental knowledge area that most liberals don’t have as a result of only really paying attention to media, who always play their role down as the media functions as fundamental collaborators with state interests.

as for what started this war? that was Russia’s illegal invasion of another sovereign nation. period. and, unless you’re implying that “the West” or even the US somehow controls him or his actions, I don’t see how either had anything to do with Putin’s decision to invade Ukraine.

This is the liberal western interpretation. It is not the global left’s interpretation which has a fairly significant consensus that this war was caused by nato expansionism, ignoring fair security concerns, and the 2014 coup that led to the civil war that preceded this. The left generally doesn’t view this war as having started in 2022 but instead in 2014, with Russia eventually joining as a belligerent after exhausting the potential methods of ending it via the Minsk agreements. Both the anarchist and socialist left worldwide pretty much agrees on this, with people ranging from Chomsky, Vijay Prashad, Wolff, Yanis Varoufakis, Lula, Corbyn, Cuba, Bolivia, european socialist parties etc etc etc all having the same take across the board. None of whom get much media exposure of that of course, because like I said before the western media is collaborative with the interests of western states.

I think for context I should add that I live in the UK and that from the perspective of British politics, american liberals are to the right of our conservatives, most of you would be Tories in the UK. Understanding this context is probably important for you to understand that I do not include liberals when I say “left” or “global left”, the american democrats are extremely right wing.

Oh I apologise I forget sometimes everyone here isn’t a marxist now after the reddit waves, marxists would just pick up the intention from context and keeping up with news via parties and groups they’re in. The “they” here is generally western aligned think tanks and forces. In particular the Atlantic Council which is largely responsible for a lot of US policy has been pushing it around in the media recently.

And how in the world do you get from here to there? Because all i see now is a fractured and demoralized military that’s lost all momentum, a weakened Putin, a shocked Russian public, and Prigozian and Lukashenko (and who knows who else) lurking in the wings. A lot has already changed, and uncertainty abounds.

A marxist understanding of the war in Ukraine is as a war that was created by the west, led by the US, that benefits quite a significant number of MIC forces with large influence over US policy. Part of the narrative that maintains support for the war is the ongoing belief that Russia can be defeated, and the method of Russian defeated that has been drummed up is “Russia will collapse” as everyone with any sense can see that there is no military means of victory. If the “Russia will collapse” narrative is destroyed by the reality of a rebellion demonstrating massive support that makes any collapse obviously impossible then the entire house of cards that has been constructed falls down. Thus the result is pushing in the media the notion that it wasn’t a real rebellion but instead a grand scheme by devious clever russians.

If you have questions about how the left interprets the war I’m happy to answer.

Will you reassess this thought in 3-4 weeks if/when nothing else happens? I think it’s extremely unlikely that this is a grand scheme and that the reason this is being pushed comes from the fact that they have to keep the idea alive that Russia could collapse at any moment. If it isn’t a grand scheme then its failure forces the acceptance that Russia isn’t going to collapse and that the war is therefore entirely unwinnable, so it is much easier to present this as not having been a real coup/rebellion at all in order to keep that belief alive.

I think you’re doing Lukashenko discredit. While he’s certainly not a nice man he’s one of the very few people whose political careers survived the end of the soviet union, not only that but he prevented shock therapy from happening in Belarus, keeping much of the industry. More recently he managed to avoid the US attempts at regime change and successfully crack down on NED funded NGOs that existed to achieve those ends. All the potato memes should be seen as just that - memes. Lukashenko was the obvious party to go to as capable of being trusted by both Prigo and Putin, able to provide security and assurances to both. Very few others could have done it, Erdogan perhaps but Prigo is wanted for conspiracy to defraud the US in the west, he’s on the FBI lists, so he couldn’t go to a country with any extradition treaty with the US.

As for the Russian public they seem to view both sides of this disagreement positively, which is the complicated part of it. From their perspective this is two sides that they like having a disagreement. They love Wagner as war heroes but also love the Russian army as heroes too. So this whole situation is a “please stop fighting we like both of you” issue, how much of that is motivated by not wanting it to affect the frontlines is uncertain.

I mostly agree with the rest.

Reports on casualties and aircraft shootdowns are a bit of a mess.

All sources were essentially shadey videos that were posted by telegram accounts and then regurgitated elsewhere. Unlike a lot of aircraft downings I haven’t seen one video or photograph of a crash site, and in particular no bodies or confirmations of pilot names. This is unusual because typically civilians are first on scene to crash sites and take pictures/video.

It’s also notable that Prigozhin claims to have killed nobody, Wagner claims to have killed nobody, and the Russian state via Peskov (press secretary) also claimed no casualties.

If Putin were aiming to turn people against Wagner for this, the killing of Russian service men ought to be a very easy way to do so. We’re kinda lacking explanations for why both Prigo and the Russian state are claiming none of these actually happened, that nothing on the convoy was shot despite videos of bombings claiming that’s what the videos were of, and that the videos of attacks on aircraft were false too.

Weird scenario really. I wonder if Russia will concede these happened and walk back claims to the contrary later though, it does seem that a lot of the pro-russia accounts are not letting go of them as having actually happened, even people like Strelkov keep raising the deaths of the pilots as “tragedies”. Will be interesting to see what’s real and what isn’t when the dust settles.

A lot of the people that have come over aren’t people who want decentralisation. They are people who don’t give a shit but are unhappy with reddit.

They haven’t learned WHY reddit is making this decision. They have no understanding of why IPOs and privately owned companies will always lead to this. They do not understand.

They are just people that want their content slop, but are also mad. They don’t actually care how the slop is delivered to them they just know they want it and know they’re mad at reddit.

The result is that they want to come somewhere else and behave exactly like it is reddit, when it is not.

Lmao what a stupid argument. If you want money paywall your content and see how many people really want to see it. You do not have the right to fill anyone’s head with manipulative garbage propaganda just because you made a video about how much you love the second reich and want it to retvrn or wrote some shitty blog post.

People that call themselves CONTENT creators are the people churning out pure garbage for the bazinga-brained sake of contentcontentcontent and the quality of actually worthwhile shit would skyrocket if they would all just collectively quit because what would be leftover are the people who actually care and aren’t in it for some ad views.

Artists, critics, musicians, designers, etc etc? They don’t call themselves content creators like the bazinga-brained influencers in it purely to chase metrics. Tell the bazingas to fuck off.

Wtf? Why are people upvoting this garbage?

Google, Facebook, Tiktok, Youtube, there are TONNES of “platforms” that literally ban porn content from being uploaded to them. What are you talking about? Not viable? The biggest fucking social media site on the internet does not allow porn, the biggest video site on the internet does not allow porn.

Redditors have seriously broken brains and only know how to repeat what they’ve read other broken redditors repeat and upvote ad-infinitum without every actually thinking for 5 seconds about how ridiculous what they’re saying is.

You’re going to learn very quickly that the anti-corporate world of fediverse despises nfts, ai, crypto, and everything aligned with the silicon valley techbro-brained idiots that have taken over the existing mainstream internet. It’s going to highlight to you what a bubble reddit is for one specific opinion on most topics.

@[email protected] @[email protected] this is a good idea for the users over there to share