this post was submitted on 20 Jan 2025
53 points (96.5% liked)

196

3807 readers
1731 users here now

Community Rules

You must post before you leave

Be nice. Assume others have good intent (within reason).

Block or ignore posts, comments, and users that irritate you in some way rather than engaging. Report if they are actually breaking community rules.

Use content warnings and/or mark as NSFW when appropriate. Most posts with content warnings likely need to be marked NSFW.

Most 196 posts are memes, shitposts, cute images, or even just recent things that happened, etc. There is no real theme, but try to avoid posts that are very inflammatory, offensive, very low quality, or very "off topic".

Bigotry is not allowed, this includes (but is not limited to): Homophobia, Transphobia, Racism, Sexism, Abelism, Classism, or discrimination based on things like Ethnicity, Nationality, Language, or Religion.

Avoid shilling for corporations, posting advertisements, or promoting exploitation of workers.

Proselytization, support, or defense of authoritarianism is not welcome. This includes but is not limited to: imperialism, nationalism, genocide denial, ethnic or racial supremacy, fascism, Nazism, Marxism-Leninism, Maoism, etc.

Avoid AI generated content.

Avoid misinformation.

Avoid incomprehensible posts.

No threats or personal attacks.

No spam.

Moderator Guidelines

Moderator Guidelines

  • Don’t be mean to users. Be gentle or neutral.
  • Most moderator actions which have a modlog message should include your username.
  • When in doubt about whether or not a user is problematic, send them a DM.
  • Don’t waste time debating/arguing with problematic users.
  • Assume the best, but don’t tolerate sealioning/just asking questions/concern trolling.
  • Ask another mod to take over cases you struggle with, if you get tired, or when things get personal.
  • Ask the other mods for advice when things get complicated.
  • Share everything you do in the mod matrix, both so several mods aren't unknowingly handling the same issues, but also so you can receive feedback on what you intend to do.
  • Don't rush mod actions. If a case doesn't need to be handled right away, consider taking a short break before getting to it. This is to say, cool down and make room for feedback.
  • Don’t perform too much moderation in the comments, except if you want a verdict to be public or to ask people to dial a convo down/stop. Single comment warnings are okay.
  • Send users concise DMs about verdicts about them, such as bans etc, except in cases where it is clear we don’t want them at all, such as obvious transphobes. No need to notify someone they haven’t been banned of course.
  • Explain to a user why their behavior is problematic and how it is distressing others rather than engage with whatever they are saying. Ask them to avoid this in the future and send them packing if they do not comply.
  • First warn users, then temp ban them, then finally perma ban them when they break the rules or act inappropriately. Skip steps if necessary.
  • Use neutral statements like “this statement can be considered transphobic” rather than “you are being transphobic”.
  • No large decisions or actions without community input (polls or meta posts f.ex.).
  • Large internal decisions (such as ousting a mod) might require a vote, needing more than 50% of the votes to pass. Also consider asking the community for feedback.
  • Remember you are a voluntary moderator. You don’t get paid. Take a break when you need one. Perhaps ask another moderator to step in if necessary.

founded 5 months ago
MODERATORS
 
all 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] cm0002@lemmy.world 8 points 5 months ago (2 children)

I'm like 99% sure that "Violence is never the answer" is just yet ever more rich fuck propaganda.

[–] paperemail@links.rocks 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (3 children)

It’s also very Liberal propaganda.

Martin Luther King Jr. protested and he won so peaceful protest works!

While of course barely mentioning the Black Panthers and how MLK was suddenly a reasonable alternative to their violent resistance.

[–] Hideakikarate@sh.itjust.works 5 points 5 months ago

And his "peace" was met with an extreme act of violence. Certainly was an answer for someone(s).

[–] Stovetop@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Exactly this. The "carrot and stick" strategy doesn't work without the stick. Every time a nonviolent movement achieves something, it's because they were seen as the preferable alternative to a more militant contemporary.

[–] paperemail@links.rocks 2 points 5 months ago

Exactly. The same goes for implementing social welfare in the face of the Soviet Union and local communist movements.

[–] EldritchFeminity@lemmy.blahaj.zone 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

The only reason MLK didn't do more was because what they were already doing was illegal, and anything more could get them jail time. And this is still what they thought of him and his "peaceful" protests:

[–] BlemboTheThird@lemmy.ca 2 points 5 months ago (2 children)

They did the same shit when they pretended that BLM burned down cities. We really don't learn even from our recent history, huh?

[–] SnortsGarlicPowder@lemmy.zip 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)
[–] reallykindasorta@slrpnk.net 1 points 5 months ago

dying at this, what a perfect demonstration

Same as it ever was.

[–] Hossenfeffer@feddit.uk 1 points 5 months ago

I’m like 99% sure that “Violence is never the answer” is just yet ever more rich fuck propaganda.

"Violence (against the rich) is never the answer!" is what they really mean.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 4 points 5 months ago (1 children)

When two sides are fighting, and one uses violence and the other doesn't, side using violence almost always wins.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world 0 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (2 children)

There is a broader strategic understanding of power, such that an underdog doing violence can afford the authoritarian government political capital to retaliate disproportionately. A peer doing violence authorizes retaliation in kind. A superior force doing violence can only realistically be retreated from until the tables can be turned.

Oct 7th is a great case in point. Palestinians revolted and Israelis spent the next year paying them back with hellfire missiles into ambulances and machine gun rounds into NICU units, while their friends in the US and Germany and Russia and Saudi Arabia clapped. Yemen and Iran interceding on Gaza's behalf might be seen as noble from a certain point of view, but it failed to halt the slaughter. Meanwhile, the Israelis and their American allies expanded the scope of violence into the West Bank, the Persian Gulf, Lebanon, and Syria.

Using violence doesn't mean you'll win. It means you'll legitimize a reprisal (which threatens to legitimize a reprisal, etc, etc). Escalate far enough and you end up with the Twin Towers in flames or a mushroom cloud over Hiroshima and Nagasaki. It ends with the obliteration of whole countries and the loss of millions of lives.

Who comes out ahead after all of this? Who benefits in the long run? I'm having a hard time finding any winners.

[–] daltotron@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago

Who comes out ahead after all of this? Who benefits in the long run? I’m having a hard time finding any winners.

Nobody ever really wins here. In either the short term, or the long term, with or without violence. If the clap back of oct 7th hadn't happened, then the state of affairs would've remained exactly as horrible as they've always been, and probably would've slowly decomposed even further, and the population probably would've just died slower deaths over the course of several years. Certainly in retrospect, that maybe seems better than the alternative, but nobody knows the future, really. It could be just as likely the oct 7th was exactly the kind of pressure that started a chain of events that ultimately leads to the deconstruction of the state of israel. It's completely impossible to know the future, completely, anything else is kind of just armchair speculation.

We have to place oct 7th into context, and to place it into context, we have to have a chain of causality. That eliminates the sort of responsibility that people like to attribute to everything. It doesn't eliminate tactics, or the decision making process, it actually enhances it, if anything, but we do have to look at, say, how the state of affairs in gaza lead to such an attack. Both in how such a sorry state led to such an attack, obviously, and also in how Hamas was funded as their government in part by israel in order to ensure a more violent opposing force that would be more willing to mutually escalate with them, especially when that force is locked in to a specific location and can only really fight on israel's terms, unlike most of israel's other actors, which can fight more on the terms of the international political stage. Obviously still a deck which is heavily stacked against them, but slightly less so.

What I mean by all of this is that israel manufactured the conditions to enact their genocide, and that escalation would've happened either way because they're not able to be bargained with. Under that framework, any tactic the gazans, specifically, could've taken, was pretty much doomed to failure from the start. Or rather, was doomed to not really have a positive outcome in the immediate short term, for them specifically. I'm not saying oct 7th was really a wise decision, right, I'm just saying that we don't really know. Maybe attribute to me analysis paralysis, then, I'm not quite sure, ironically, but I think it's easier to have a hindsight-accurate armchair QB backseat approach to this than to make those decisions of what to do in the moment.

[–] AppleTea@lemmy.zip 1 points 5 months ago

You're not wrong.

But also, a people can only retreat from a superior force for so long. When every olive branch is denied, when peaceful action is responded to with force, when people are too exhausted to know what else to do -- violence becomes inevitable.

Oct 7th is a great case in point. For years, Palestinians protested Israeli settlements and soldiers with peaceful marches. And the IDF responded by sniping at the peaceful protestor's kneecaps. All with little to no reaction from outside news outlets and governments.

When people's back is against the wall, when their only choice is between a long, drawn out violence at the whims of others OR a sharp, intense violence with some semblance of agency -- you really can't blame them for picking the semblance of agency.

[–] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 3 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Soap box

Ballot box

Ammo box <-- we are here not by choice, but we must answer

[–] explodicle@sh.itjust.works 1 points 5 months ago

You missed jury box! Free Luigi!

[–] Maggoty@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

After Ballot and Before Ammo is Street. It's an important stage because if you can't get enough people in the street then the ammo box isn't going to help you.

[–] Zorsith@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

A rich jackass with no actual government position took the podium at the presidential inauguration, did the nazi salute, and wasn't promptly shot or arrested. That says a lot about the state of this country.

[–] Didros@beehaw.org 0 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Yeah, he did a nazi salute, not admitted to being a communist. Being a nazi has never not been accepted and normal in America.

Violence is the answer when less universal languages stop being an option