this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2024
221 points (95.9% liked)

MeanwhileOnGrad

1428 readers
5 users here now

"Oh, this is calamity! Calamity! Oh no, he's on the floor!"

Welcome to MoG!


Meanwhile On Grad


Documenting hate speech, conspiracy theories, apologia/revisionism, and general tankie behaviour across the fediverse. Memes are welcome!


What is a Tankie?


Alternatively, a detailed blog post about Tankies.

(caution of biased source)


Basic Rules:

Sh.itjust.works Instance rules apply! If you are from other instances, please be mindful of the rules. — Basically, don't be a dick.

Hate-Speech — You should be familiar with this one already; practically all instances have the same rules on hate speech.

Apologia(Using the Modern terminology for Apologia) No Defending, Denying, Justifying, Bolstering, or Differentiating authoritarian acts or endeavours, whether be a Pro-CCP viewpoint, Stalinism, Islamic Terrorism or any variation of Tankie Ideology.

Revisionism — No downplaying or denying atrocities past and present. Calling Tankies shills, foreign/federal agents, or bots also falls under this rule. Extremists exist. They are real. Do not call them shills or fake users as it handwaves their extremism.

Tankies can explain their views but may be criticised or attacked for them. Any slight infraction on the rules above will immediately earn a warning and possibly a ban.

Off-topic Discussion — Do not discuss unrelated topics to the point of derailing the thread. Stay focused on the direct content of the post as opposed to arguing.

You'll be warned if you're violating the instance and community rules. Continuing poor behaviour after being warned will result in a ban or removal of your comments. Bans typically only last 24 hours, but each subsequent infraction will double the amount. Depending on the content, the ban time may be increased. You may request an unban at any time.


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] fxomt@lemm.ee 155 points 1 week ago (38 children)

Ah yes, the infamously transphobic instance, lemmy.blahaj.zone.

[–] Kichae@lemmy.ca 24 points 1 week ago

Well, you see, if you criticize a trans person's politics, that's transphobia. Doesn't matter if their politics are orthogonal to their transness, and it doesn't matter if you, yourself, are trans.

Just look at Israel to see how this works.

[–] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (2 children)

No I think they’re putting words in OP’s mouth because I recall some drama where Blahaj members accused sh.itjust.works of being a transphobic instance

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 36 points 1 week ago (4 children)

Hexbear et co literally have called Blahaj a transphobic instance, numerous times. Lunacy.

[–] SARGE@startrek.website 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Like many right-wing fascist-simps-in-arms, plenty know some buzzwords to get people riled up, but don't know when and where to properly use them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] OhFudgeBars@lemmy.world 7 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Is the fediverse always like this? Inter-instance shitflinging?

[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Mostly, no. Usually, it's just .world and .ml that get into slapfights. Hexbear is just bizarre.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 week ago

Hexbear is a horrific mix of trolls and true believers that makes it weirdly toxic.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (36 replies)
[–] obre@lemmy.world 85 points 1 week ago (2 children)

In interactions with authoritarians, I'm often reminded of Jean-Paul Sartre's description of anti-semites.

“Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.”

Tankies follow the same underlying basis for their justifications of authoritarianism as every other stripe.

[–] spujb@lemmy.cafe 15 points 1 week ago

woah you kind of ate it up with this comment. huge insight/comparisons here i’d never considered.

[–] Railcar8095@lemm.ee 14 points 1 week ago

I should post this to every tankie that comes with their BS

[–] Blaze@feddit.org 50 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Handy that your client shows that it's a 4 days account

Voyager mobile. Yeah it’s a cool feature.

[–] FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone 43 points 1 week ago (4 children)

The meme I sent in the original pic

[–] InnerScientist@lemmy.world 36 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] turtlepower@lemm.ee 26 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] yuri@pawb.social 26 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] thefartographer@lemm.ee 12 points 1 week ago

Huh... I'm a bigot!

[–] TachyonTele@lemm.ee 13 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Im going to throw a hissy fit now.

[–] turtlepower@lemm.ee 8 points 1 week ago (5 children)

I'm so sorry. The fruit was right there, hanging low, looking delicious. I just had to do it!

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 18 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] ebolapie@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Thanks for the context that seems reasonable

[–] techfox@sh.itjust.works 14 points 1 week ago

The better timeline

[–] DeathsEmbrace@lemm.ee 14 points 1 week ago (6 children)

The longer you live the more you learn all countries are bad in there own right.

[–] FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone 27 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Hence me becoming an anarchist ahah

As someone from Switzerland it pisses me off how some people see our country as a utopia. We still have massive inequalities and suffering. People may not be dying on the streets, but they are sure as hell dying preventable deaths behind closed doors.

[–] KaRunChiy@fedia.io 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Gotta imagine how horrifying life is in other countries where they see a greener pasture across every other field but theirs

[–] FundMECFSResearch@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Yeah.

It’s crazy though because I’ve had times where I’m unable to get enough food to eat. Or afford to pay for rent and therefore been forced into a psych ward because that’s where they throw homeless people. I’ve watched friends die of malnutrition when I couldn’t afford to help.

But to others, that’s a utopia.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] Carmakazi@lemmy.world 40 points 1 week ago (1 children)

new accounts

As in they're getting banned a lot or they're trolling/sockpuppeting, or both.

[–] ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works 20 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The one true scotsman would never!

[–] Atelopus-zeteki@fedia.io 9 points 1 week ago

From (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman)

No true Scotsman or appeal to purity is an informal fallacy in which one attempts to protect an initial a posteriori claim from a subsequent falsifying counterexample by then covertly modifying the initial claim.[1][2][3] Rather than admitting error or providing evidence that would disqualify the falsifying counterexample, the claim is modified into an a priori claim to definitionally (as opposed to evidentially) exclude the undesirable counterexample.[4] The modification is usually identifiable by the use of non-substantive rhetoric such as "true", "pure", "genuine", "authentic", or "real", which can be used to locate when the shift in meaning of the claim occurs.[2]

Philosophy professor Bradley Dowden explains the fallacy as an "ad hoc rescue" of a refuted generalization attempt.[1] The following is a simplified rendition of the fallacy:[5]

Person A: "No Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge." Person B: "But my uncle Angus is a Scotsman and he puts sugar on his porridge." Person A: "But no true Scotsman puts sugar on his porridge."

[–] nesc@lemmy.cafe 16 points 1 week ago

on new accounts

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 week ago

you are a bigot because you disagree with me on something random

Pretty much this, and yes, I see it a lot too

load more comments
view more: next ›