On lemmy.world I posted a comment on how liberals use ‘tankie’ as an invective to shut down dialogue and received tons of hateful replies. I tried to respond in a rational way to each. Someone’s said ‘get educated’ I responded ‘Im reading Norman Finkelstein’s I’ll burn that bridge when I get there’ and tried to keep it civil.
They deleted every comment I made and banned me. Proving my point, they just want to shut down dialogue. Freedom of speech doesn’t existing in those ‘totalitarian’ countries right? But in our ‘enlightened’ western countries we just delete you.
Nice definition of tankie! Got that from wish?
At what point does being clowned on by an entire instance spur self-reflection?
Look what people wrote as replies to my comment, look how the upvote downvote numbers are, think.
My key takeaway from this post is: people on lemmygrad say they are interested in discussion and all those other instances are oh so bad, because they block them or doenvote them or call them tankies, which people on lemmygrad interpret as slur.
At the same time, you get down voted to oblivion, when you even write the definition of tankies to someone, who calls himself one. People who are pride to be a tankies onLemmygrad: cherished People who criticise this in anyway: laught at.
And simultaneously everyone who calls anyone else except him self a tankie no matter the context is automatically a liberal, when Servers defederate them, they are all facists or love fascists
People making strawman arguments when I say in a discussion that I don’t agree with Stalin (“ohhh so capitalism is sooo much better” - no, its not, and I didn’t say that, I can disagree with capitalism and stlinism at the same time, go figure)
And people defending (literal) tankies get upvoted, people who don’t get down voted.
This server has lost one of the strongest tools in material dialectic: (self-) critical thinking
I really hoped I would find interesting debates here, but this is a circlejerk
At what point will self reflection kick in? At what point t people in an echo chamber realise its one?
If you don’t send tanks into hungary, the nazis will do pogroms and construct concentration camps there. Not sending tanks is inhumanly cruel.
Mathematician 1: 1+1=2 Mathematician 2: 1+1=2
Debatebro: Muh echo chamber!
Yeah, cause stating “tankie” means “every communist I don’t like” is the only truth and like saying 1+1 =2
Also comparing societal questions to mathematical ones is totally unconcerning
/kappa
Marxism-Leninism is a branch of science. What I’m saying is that we all get the same results because that’s how science works.
Everyone who has in interest in science knows that you can’t prove opinions, but only facts. You can prove stuff like “capitalism is destroying the ecosystem” or “China masacered the Uigurs” you can’t prove stuff like “Stalin was right” or “the bests way to interpret Marx is to consider the context he wrote in”
That’s the basic difference between empirical and normative science.
And basically all questions of politics are at least partially normative.
I agree that materialistic dialectics can be used as scientific tools, and are by most people, but science also means, you accept that no one can have the “only true opinion” as empirical facts can be interpreted widely different and no human has ALL information. And even if one had, there are always subjective weightings at play (is human suffering worse than human death? Is animal death worse than human suffering? Is the system more valuable than individual freedoms?)
Science means knowing what you can and can’t prove, so if you are scientific, you know that not everybody comes to the same conclusion even when using the same facts.
So what’s your problem then? The tanks were sent and the nazis were crushed. Also, krushchev sent the tanks, not stalin. What’s your problem with stalin?
What’s my problem with Stalin?
I could not have described my problem with talking to people here better than you demonstrated it in this simple question, even if I would have used 100 words.