archomrade [he/him]

  • 9 Posts
  • 752 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 20th, 2023

help-circle






  • Browsing their coms can be a pretty unique experience, especially if you go in with a preformed idea of what their communities are like. There’s a huge spread of interests and experiences, and sometimes you can be browsing a niche community and forget that these were the people posting BPB on lemmy.world threads a year ago.

    Knowing the academic writings and history they’re referencing helps a lot with understanding where they are coming from, even if you may not agree with all of it.



  • This is the most reasonable response.

    A lot of people here have long since made up their mind about hexbear based both on repeated meta posting on the topic and possibly a bad experience or two with them on a topic they assumed was uncontested but is a landmine topic for communists of a particular bent

    I’ve personally never had a bad experience with hexbears, possibly because I’m more empathetic to their perspective, but more likely because I know when it’s time to disengage. There are users on lemmy who feel strongly about a certain topic that’s abrasive to hexbear users and dig in their heels when jeered at (or maybe feel a personal responsibility to stand them down) and are usually the users here who have the most complaints, because the standard reaction from hexbear users is irreverence (both the users and the mods).

    Unlike a lot of liberals coming from reddit, communists often don’t have delusions about the neutrality of moderation and so they’ll ban you on a whim if they think you’re there to stir shit. They use the ban hammer judiciously even with users on their own instance. That’s often the biggest complaint both with hexbear and with lemmy.ml.




  • I have no problem acknowledging Russia’s aggression and imperialist activities, but NATO fanboys pretend as if NATO members are the ‘good guys’ and cannot themselves be seen as the instigators of European conflict.

    NATO ends up categorizing conflict in Europe into two sides and ignores all conflict originating on the member side. An alliance that includes all members would at least in-theory be more equitable, but we already know that even a global supergovernment can selectively enforce their mission and ignore offenses by particular members.



  • Sorry, their presumed mission of ensuring peace in Europe through collective defense.

    It’s built and structured around Russia being the main antagonist but it’s mostly been the US who’s activities have been destabilizing the security of Europe.

    But you’re right, the explicit mission is to protect their members and noone else, so I guess everything is working as intended







  • Sure they do, but that’s immaterial to the US state department who views Israel’s dominance in the ME essential to their own control over the region (at the expense of the US taxpayer and, ya know, all of the lives killed and destroyed from endless armed conflict).

    The point is that the primary benefit to the US arming pretty much any group in the world is realized through the use of those weapons on innocent people the world over, whether it’s the Taliban, Hezbollah, or Israel. Whereas the primary benefit to a company like Glock from selling weapons to American cops is realized from the sale itself - they don’t benefit from POC being killed by overzealous cops… at least, not through any way the public can reasonably see.


  • The US is responsible for the death of Palestinians because it’s not getting paid for its weapons?? That’s the moral theory? Insufficient profit?

    absolutely not; as I said, there is a legitimate discussion to have about for-profit activities conducted under a compulsory capitalist system.

    The US does not even have financial self-interest as an excuse, and moreover their motivation for providing lethal aid is only satisfied through the use of those weapons. An arms manufacturer (rife with moral conflict as they are) gains nothing from the use of their weapons, only in selling them. The US’s foreign policy is dictated through their judicious use of force on comparatively defenseless foreign powers - they gain benefit from killing, mutilating, and genociding populations at their behest abroad.