cross-posted from: https://feddit.nl/post/16246531

I feel like we need to talk about Lemmy’s massive tankie censorship problem. A lot of popular lemmy communities are hosted on lemmy.ml. It’s been well known for a while that the admins/mods of that instance have, let’s say, rather extremist and onesided political views. In short, they’re what’s colloquially referred to as tankies. This wouldn’t be much of an issue if they didn’t regularly abuse their admin/mod status to censor and silence people who dissent with their political beliefs and for example, post things critical of China, Russia, the USSR, socialism, …

As an example, there was a thread today about the anniversary of the Tiananmen Massacre. When I was reading it, there were mostly posts critical of China in the thread and some whataboutist/denialist replies critical of the USA and the west. In terms of votes, the posts critical of China were definitely getting the most support.

I posted a comment in this thread linking to “https://archive.ph/2020.07.12-074312/https://imgur.com/a/AIIbbPs” (WARNING: graphical content), which describes aspects of the atrocities that aren’t widely known even in the West, and supporting evidence. My comment was promptly removed for violating the “Be nice and civil” rule. When I looked back at the thread, I noticed that all posts critical of China had been removed while the whataboutist and denialist comments were left in place.

This is what the modlog of the instance looks like:

Definitely a trend there wouldn’t you say?

When I called them out on their one sided censorship, with a screenshot of the modlog above, I promptly received a community ban on all communities on lemmy.ml that I had ever participated in.

Proof:

So many of you will now probably think something like: “So what, it’s the fediverse, you can use another instance.”

The problem with this reasoning is that many of the popular communities are actually on lemmy.ml, and they’re not so easy to replace. I mean, in terms of content and engagement lemmy is already a pretty small place as it is. So it’s rather pointless sitting for example in /c/linux@some.random.other.instance.world where there’s nobody to discuss anything with.

I’m not sure if there’s a solution here, but I’d like to urge people to avoid lemmy.ml hosted communities in favor of communities on more reasonable instances.

  • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
    1312·
    29 days ago

    Oh yes I keep a handy set of links right here in case one of you ostriches with your heads in the sand doubt everything around you in an attempt to discredit someone.

    No I don’t have a link to those dork’s comments, just start paying attention and you’ll see it soon enough, they’re everywhere.

    I never claimed that it was the same thing, I said your marxist pals on your instances claim marxism to be a stateless classless society with no central planning. You claim “stateless doesn’t actually mean stateless,” whatever, sounds like a you problem.

    • Cowbee [he/him]@lemmy.mlEnglish
      1213·
      29 days ago

      So, in other words, “I made it up.”

      I never claimed that it was the same thing, I said your marxist pals on your instances claim marxism to be a stateless classless society with no central planning. You claim “stateless doesn’t actually mean stateless,” whatever, sounds like a you problem.

      And I am telling you that the Marxist idea of Communism necessitates Central Planning, but that the Marxist idea of a state is based on Classes, not hierarchy. Here is Engels directly stating as such in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific:

      When, at last, it becomes the real representative of the whole of society, it renders itself unnecessary. As soon as there is no longer any social class to be held in subjection; as soon as class rule, and the individual struggle for existence based upon our present anarchy in production, with the collisions and excesses arising from these, are removed, nothing more remains to be repressed, and a special repressive force, a State, is no longer necessary. The first act by virtue of which the State really constitutes itself the representative of the whole of society — the taking possession of the means of production in the name of society — this is, at the same time, its last independent act as a State. State interference in social relations becomes, in one domain after another, superfluous, and then dies out of itself; the government of persons is replaced by the administration of things, and by the conduct of processes of production. The State is not “abolished”. It dies out. This gives the measure of the value of the phrase: “a free State”, both as to its justifiable use at times by agitators, and as to its ultimate scientific insufficiency; and also of the demands of the so-called anarchists for the abolition of the State out of hand.

      Stateless in Marxism is not the same as Stateless in Anarchism. The repressive elements of government upholding class relations die out in favor of the administration of things. Central planning.

      • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        141·
        28 days ago

        you are putting specific terminology in place of the words as written,and claiming it’s a clear connotation, when it is not

      • Unruffled [he/him]@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        54·
        28 days ago

        The repressive elements of government upholding class relations die out in favor of the administration of things.

        When did a communist government ever stop being repressive? It’s nice in theory n’ all.

        • WanderingVentra@lemm.eeEnglish
          42·
          28 days ago

          When has a capitalist state not been repressive?

          Also, communist states are repressive to the bourgeoisie by definition, and this is usually pounced in by capitalist propaganda to demonize their projects as a whole.

    • OpenStars@discuss.onlineEnglish
      44·
      28 days ago

      Ignoring 99% of what you said, while hyper-focusing on a single matter that they choose, asking you to provide your references yet not providing ones in turn (or more commonly by the more prepared ones, the references that are provided turn out to support your position even, if read properly or possibly even at all!!!) is a common tactic. Don’t let yourself be distracted from whatever it is that you true goal is. You cannot win an argument against someone who refuses to engage in good faith. Moreover, by trying you simply give them a platform to continue.

      Whatever you say, they declare “victory”, and those who refuse to realize the difference… well, that’s on them.

      • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
        41·
        28 days ago

        Tbh not only do I do it for third parties to be able to have the full picture, (I do kinda have fun calling them stupid, too. Lmao. Don’t tell them though, they continue to say dumb things if they don’t know you want them to.)

        • OpenStars@discuss.onlineEnglish
          43·
          28 days ago

          I tend to start out that way… but it can be so easy to forget and get sucked in. Well, so long as you know what you are doing!:-)

      • WanderingVentra@lemm.eeEnglish
        41·
        28 days ago

        Ignoring 99% of what you said

        Cowbee pretty clearly replies to everything they said and answered it. They replied that other Marxists say this stuff, which is a claim that needs proof. Cowbee already provided proof for their claims. Basically the only response was that Marxists did believe what he thought they did, which is a baseless claim that needs proof. You’re going the exact thing of ignoring 99% of what they said.