On April 15th, people from over 30 cities around the world will launch a global economic blockade answering the call from Gaza to fight for a liberated Palestine. 75 years and 182 days into this U...
We read every report, but only take mod actions where it is warranted. Reading through what @flora_explorer@beehaw.org has posted here, I don’t see anything that would violate any instance rules. You are welcome to block them if you don’t want to engage with their arguments.
my concern isn’t instance-wide rules. as i said, in another community, my tact would have been totally different. my concern is whether this is actually an anarchist community or no.
What does being an anarchist community mean to you? To my mind, if someone self identifies as an anarchist then they should be welcome here. If they are just here for trolling then that’s another issue, but I don’t think it applies in this case.
It seems to me that you are the only person badjacketing in this post. If you think it’s a good policy to ban fellow anarchists for having a nuanced view on the Gaza situation, then you might want to check out hexbear - intolerant authoritarianism is their whole vibe.
You’re clearly very naive and cannot see the world as more than black and white. Now the Israeli state are the bad guys and the Palestinians are the good guys. So now it is OK to boycott jews again, shout about the eradication of the Jewish state and its people (“from the river to the sea”) and talk about a one-directional genocide since “75 years and 182 days”. This is either really really stupid or blatantly antisemitic.
They said that advocating for the eradication of the Jewish state and it’s people is either stupid or antisemitic. If you aren’t advocating that (and I don’t have any particular reason to think you are) then that statement doesn’t even apply to you. It’s a straw man argument. But looking at the link you posted, there’s a “river to the sea” comment right there from someone else. So I can see where they might have gotten that impression. Seems to me we can chalk this up to a simple misunderstanding. They made bad faith assumptions about you, you made bad faith assumptions against them. Lets move on.
We read every report, but only take mod actions where it is warranted. Reading through what @flora_explorer@beehaw.org has posted here, I don’t see anything that would violate any instance rules. You are welcome to block them if you don’t want to engage with their arguments.
my concern isn’t instance-wide rules. as i said, in another community, my tact would have been totally different. my concern is whether this is actually an anarchist community or no.
What does being an anarchist community mean to you? To my mind, if someone self identifies as an anarchist then they should be welcome here. If they are just here for trolling then that’s another issue, but I don’t think it applies in this case.
an anarchist community doesn’t allow badjacketing and punching left, something this user is doing.
if it were up to me, we would have the same policies as reddit’s anarchism subreddit.
and they would not tolerate this user’s comments.
It seems to me that you are the only person badjacketing in this post. If you think it’s a good policy to ban fellow anarchists for having a nuanced view on the Gaza situation, then you might want to check out hexbear - intolerant authoritarianism is their whole vibe.
i was called antisemitic
They said that advocating for the eradication of the Jewish state and it’s people is either stupid or antisemitic. If you aren’t advocating that (and I don’t have any particular reason to think you are) then that statement doesn’t even apply to you. It’s a straw man argument. But looking at the link you posted, there’s a “river to the sea” comment right there from someone else. So I can see where they might have gotten that impression. Seems to me we can chalk this up to a simple misunderstanding. They made bad faith assumptions about you, you made bad faith assumptions against them. Lets move on.
Refer to https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/comment/9514481 for my response to flora.
only a bad faith interpretation could have led anyone to think it’s antisemitism.
i am unconvinced this is true.