Hexbear
Hexbear
Hexbear
I figure it works just like Candyman.
My instance defederated from those lot
Before Hexbear ever federated with you, humerously enough.
Before Hexbear ever federated with you, humerously enough.
Very ‘humerously’. World took one look at pigs-shitting-on-their-own-balls spam and said “No thank you” to Hexbear’s proposed federation. :)
Haven’t seen PPB in a long time, honestly. Either way, it’s still nice to recognise that Hexbear proposed an olive branch and .world turned it down.
Hexbear is well known for being good faith in those type of situations.
Other instances seem to have little issue with Hexbear.
Oh jolly, someone from .ml .
Don’t worry, soon enough you’ll be defederated too xx
Yep, I wouldn’t doubt it, then probably dbzer0 will follow, and maybe even blahaj.zone after that.
Personally I don’t really much for .world posts, but I do know the admins on .ml have maintained that they believe instances that are more open to federation will be more stable in the long run, and .world admins appear to want to remain somewhat friendly with the devs, so we are at a standstill.
I wouldn’t put dbzer0 and blahaj anywhere near the tanky instances
They want to peddle a persecution narrative, because it’s the only way they can cope with the fact that, in reality, they’re disliked because they run in a toxic fascist community.
People said the same about Lemmy.ml, .world always wants a target.
Yes, .ml isn’t as bad a tankie instance as hexbear and lemmygrad are when talking about the user base in general, present company excluded of cause. And I have heard bad stories about mods but I still wouldn’t put it in the same bucket
Unless the tankies jump over to dbzer0 or blahaj because they feel so lonely since they can’t troll anymore, those won’t be defederated.
.world will pull that trigger and then it’ll become a little echo chamber that will eventually die out while the rest of us on the lemmyverse will watch and wonder if anything can be done.
Yes, the largest Lemmy instance will become a little echo chamber because it doesn’t view fascism as “just a differing viewpoint that needs to be respected 🥺”
let history inform your opinion: there have been multiple reddit diasporas feeding into other social media platforms and at least 2 of them were larger than the one that’s currently swelling the ranks of lemmy.world; every single one has failed once they turned into an echo chamber.
I generally agree, and I think that’s why they haven’t pulled the trigger.
It’s more like Bloody Mary except you need to be looking in an online forum instead of a mirror.
Tbf for some, it works with a mirror too.
Great, now they’re gonna all see this and say we’re paid by George Soros… So can we all agree to deposit our Sorors checks™ and not speak of this again? I’d really rather enjoy this handout moving forward…
Life expectancy in China was just 32 in the year 1850, and over the course of the next 170 years, it more than doubled to 76.6.
If you do the math then in 2190 they’ll be living until they are 153.2.
This is the most dumbest comment I have seen all year.
most dumbest comment
Nice one 😄
deleted by creator
It was actually still around 32 for a hundred years after 1850, it had been sitting stagnant right up until the communists came to power.
Asian co prosperity sphere v2
There’s camps this time too!
Don’t forget the organ harvesting, that some weird opera producing cult is stealing valor over for some reason
Oh China. Always invading countries and toppling regimes: but its good.
Now, now… Don’t be upset that they’ve failed miserably in Korea and Vietnam to do those things.
Who hasn’t failed at that there
My man, yk I could just say flip the liberal whataboutism and that being history and also point ye at the U.S occupying parts of Syria, and controlling South Korea’s military now as we speak
You can’t flip what was already stated. The one I responded to was literal whataboutism.
deleted by creator
as someone in the periphery, i see us imperialism first hand but none of that infamous chinese imperialism you guys like to rave about. they have been trading with us and investing some, thats it.
How much imperialism you’ll experience and from what source depends greatly on where you are located. The worst Chinese imperialism takes place within their own borders and those of nearby nations. This is almost always true of empires across history.
That said, they are cautiously expanding into global imperialism as US power gradually wanes. But the early forms are harder to recognize as such. US power is so entrenched that they don’t need to be as careful to disguise what they do.
Chinese imperialism takes place within their own borders
thats not what imperialism even is
Imperialism is the nature of expansionist empires. Once they’ve conquered other disparate regions, they continue to practice imperialism by repressing, exterminating or assimilating disparate peoples within those expanded borders. To suggest otherwise would be deny the past imperialism of the British Empire. Was repression and violence against India not imperialist when that country was part of the empire? This seems absurd, especially when you recognize that imperial borders often exist primarily on paper. These peripheral territories only become truly integrated after local diversity and autonomy is crushed. We’ve seen much similar activity in China over the last several decades.
If you drink the kool-aid of your local instance then you probably believe the completely fabricated and ahistorical definition of imperialism that Stalin invented to deflect criticism of his own imperialism. This will make it impossible for you to recognize non-western imperialism, which is by design.
wtf are you on about
So you have seen it, you just refuse to acknowledge it. Glad we cleared that up.
i havent. dont make things up.
deleted by creator
How would you empower the proletariat?
Not aping bourgeois capitalist oligarchy would be a good start. As for details, I believe there’s a vast amount of socialist writing and thought that doesn’t involve “Let’s make a fascist capitalist state and it’ll totally give power to the proletariat, eventually, somehow” as one of its core tenets.
Ok I didn’t ask how not to do it. How would one go about this in concrete terms, guided by the plethora of attempts in the past? How do you avoid it getting crushed by the united bourgeoisie of other countries?
Yugoslavia style market socialism. Corporations as workers coops. Hell, even central planning would be more socialist than “We’re literally just running a capitalist crony state”. But it seems that fascism is the only acceptable path to socialism according to many Very Interested Online Leftists.
anarcho-syndicalism with a flavour of market-socialism sounds good too me.
Better question. How does giving China and Russia more power empower the proletariat?
Who said that?
I don’t have
anall the answers, so I guess I shouldn’t criticize anything China does. Or the United States or anyone else!/s
Edit: typo
You don’t have the answers because you don’t actually care about “empowering the proletariat” beyond using the proletariat as a rhetorical device to beat up a strawman. Plenty of time to post how China’s doing it wrong, no time to do something constructive
The fuck does this even mean?
Oh bother
To be fair, regardless of your political views (pro-U.S or pro-China)
I guarantee, this is a more impactful change than the U.S or China’s politics, on their own, will ever get… at least something’s new IN THE WORLD
(I’m not even gonna convince y’all on whether China is good or not or America bad; I have my own views, you have yer own)
I hate this dichotomy of pro-us or pro-china.
It is possible (and highly encouraged) to use basic critical thinking and be critical of both when relevant.
You would probably classify me as pro-us, because I think tianman square was a horrible massacre and russian forces are commiting war crimes in ukraine. Doesnt mean I’m not critical of american imperialism. You can be critical to both. And in your whataboutism, I think a lot of ML, Hexbear accounts fail to be critical when appropriate of both.
It is possible (and highly encouraged) to use basic critical thinking and be critical of both when relevant.
You would probably classify me as pro-us, because I think tianman square was a horrible massacre and russian forces are commiting war crimes in ukraine. Doesnt mean I’m not critical of american imperialism. You can be critical to both. And in your whataboutism, I think a lot of ML, Hexbear accounts fail to be critical when appropriate of both.
Eh, fair enough.
😮
tips hat
The real question is if a person is truly critical of American imperialism or will still vote for politicians doing said imperialism.
Give a lot of us a valid alternate choice and we’ll fuckin vote for that, how the fuck does giving the child rapist conman power over the worlds most powerful country empower the proletariat? How does letting Ukraine be invaded empower the proletariat? How does letting China absorb Taiwan empower the proletariat? The US is the least bad choice that we have at the moment (until you fucks let Trump get in and then all sides are pretty equally garbage)
The proletariat in China are already empowered, comrade.
The proletariat in China are already empowered, comrade.
Ah, through the magic of The People’s Billionaires and The People’s Capitalist State, of course
Please do yourself a favor and spend an hour reading this. Then either come up with a better argument or accept that you’re wrong.
Read my agitprop or I won’t discuss this with you.
Lmao, enjoy sitting alone in silence then 🤷
Agitprop is usually a poster or something short and memorable. This is a well written and sourced essay on the topic at hand.
Sourced? From what? Propaganda, opinion pieces, and almost the entire library of Marx and Engels?
You know other people can have input on the economic state of “communist” nations outside of those nations right? This essay is the equivalent of those anti communist propaganda works from the height of the cold war.
The people arguing against me clearly haven’t read anything, and are incapable of arguing on this topic until they do.
Or they read enough to not fall for the propaganda
If it’s something you believe is true then you should be able to articulate it and use it in arguments. If you’re not able to make an argument in favor of it then you are either holding the belief disingenuously or don’t know enough about what you’re arguing about
That’s excruciating to read. Why would someone take an hour to read this as an answer to that comment? Only near the end does it conclude the whataboutism and try to address why “socialism” produces hundreds of billionaires.
Apparently, “it’s fine because the proles have public transit and stuff.” Perhaps magical thinking seems compelling if it is disguised in an expensive vocabulary and hiding behind many citations.
“China has billionares therefore it’s not socialism” is not an argument. It’s a thought-terminating cliche. The essay is an in-depth examination of why China should be considered socialist, and is therefore a direct refutation of that sentiment.
You keep saying it’s “whataboutism”. That’s another of those thought-terminating cliches, and you would do well to stop using it to dismiss every argument that makes you uncomfortable.
If the means of production is owned by the people, why would there be people with more money than others, let alone billions?
Uh, yes, it is an argument, whether or not you want to close your eyes to reality. Billionaires do not occur without individuals using concentrations of capital or power to extract large amounts of value from laborers. The wealth inequality in China is very present, due to the fact that it is capitalism.
You would do well to join the people capable of observing objective reality instead of scouring the web for essays that cite philosophers instead of data. That would require confronting your cognitive biases, though.
They’re literally defending the existence of The People’s Billionaires as proletarian liberation. They’re a lost cause, like most tankies.
Totally agree. The essay they posted has some funny magical thinking if you want to skim through it for a laugh. “Billionaires are good actually because we need them to be like a sort of USB plug so we can link into capitalist economies. Anyway the state can execute them as a scapegoat if the need arises. Here’s a few dozen quotes from philosophers. See? Still socialist.”
As Mao said, no investigation, no right to speak. I used to think like you do, but then I did a little investigation.
Socialism is not about wealth inequality. Socialism is about control of the means of production. Reduction in wealth inequality is an expected outcome of a socialist system, but it is not the sole marker of that system’s success. You are hyper-focusing on this specific metric and ignoring all arguments against your blinkered point of view.
Socialism is about control of the means of production.
Oh, you’re closer to reality than I imagined. Ok, so the billionaires are receiving billions of dollars with whose means of production?
Socialism is not about wealth inequality. Socialism is about control of the means of production.
“Chinese billionaires are just really well paid proletarians” said no one sane ever.
Wafling whataboutism and semantic games.
Removed by mod
I’ve clearly spend more time reading it than you have. Else you wouldn’t have linked something so embarrassing.
Removed by mod
How about you make an actual point rather than go “read my long (poorly written) propaganda piece”.
Listen, you have to read ayn rand if you want to have discourse with me. Fountainhead AND Atlas shrugged.
Until then you’re just a propagandized tankie 🤷
Only if you agree to spend an hour reading something of my choice.
Why do people think they are always teaching a class here? Like in what non tenured position has this ever worked? And what paper outside of philosophy would get away with 52 references without a single one being actual data?
No really this is weird all the 52 are from interviews or opinion pieces, there is not one primary source of data in that list. Wild.
Removed by mod
