Hey folks
I have been receiving a lot of messages every single day about federation with hexbear. Some of our users are vehemently against it, others are in full support. The conversation does not seem to be dying down, rather, the volume of messages I receive about it seems to be increasing, so I am opening this public space where we can openly discuss the topic.
I am going to write a wall of text about my own thoughts on the situation, I’m sorry, but no tl;dr this time, and I ask anybody participating in this thread to first read through this post before commenting.
Before I go any further, I want to be clear that for anybody who participates here, it is required to focus on the quality of your posts. That means:
- Be kind to each other, even if you disagree
- Use arguments rather than calling people names
- Realize that this is a divisive topic, so your comments should be even more thoughtful than usual
With that out of the way, there are a few things I want to cover.
On defederation in general
First of all, I am a firm believer that defederation must be reserved only for cases where all other methods have failed. If defederation is used liberally, then a small group of malicious users can effectively completely shut down the federated network, by simply creating the type of drama between instances which would inevitably result in defederation. In my view, federation is the biggest strength of Lemmy compared to any centralized discussion forum, so naturally I think maintaining federation by default is an important goal in general.
I am also a believer in the value of deplatforming hateful content, but I think defederation is not the best way to do this. Banning individual users, banning communities and establishing a culture of mutual support between mods and admins of different instances should be the first line of defense against such content. There are some further steps that can be taken before defederation as well, but these are not really documented anywhere (in order to prevent circumvention). The point is: for myself, defederation is the absolute last resort, only to be used when it is completely clear that other methods are ineffective.
Finally, I am wary of creating a false expectation among lemm.ee users that lemm.ee admins endorse all users and communities and content on instances we are federated with. Here at lemm.ee, we use a blocklist for federation, which means our default apporach is to federate with all new instances. We do not have the resources (manpower, skills and knowledge) necessary to pass judgement on all instances which exist out there, as a result, users on lemm.ee are expected to curate their own content to quite a high degree. In addition to downvoting and/or reporting as necessary, individual lemm.ee users are also able to block specific users and communities, and the ability to block entire instances is coming very soon as well.
Having said all that, in a situation where all other methods do indeed fail, defederation is not out of the question. Making such a call is up to the discretion of lemm.ee admins, and doing it as a last resort is completely in line with our federation policy.
Regarding hexbear
Hexbear is an established Lemmy instance, focused on many flavors of leftism. They have quite a large userbase who are very active on Lemmy (often so active that they leave the impression brigading all popular Lemmy posts). One important thing to note is that while some forms of bigotry seem to be quite accepted by many hexbear users (but seemingly not by mods - more on that below), they at least are very protective of LGBT rights (and yes, I am quite certain that they are not just pretending to do this, as many users seem to believe). Additionally, while I have noticed quite high quality posts from hexbear users, there are also several users there who seem to really enjoy trolling and baiting (very reminiscent of 4chan-type “for the lulz” posting), and it’s important to note that this kind of posting is in general allowed on hexbear itself.
The reason this whole topic is important to so many people right now (despite hexbear being a relatively old instance), is that hexbear only recently enabled federation. A combination of their volume of posts, their strong convictions, the excitement about federation, and the aforementioned trolling has made them very visible to almost all Lemmy users, and this has sparked discussions about the value of federation with hexbear on a lot of Lemmy instances.
My own experience with hexbear
I want to write down my own experience with interacting with hexbear users, mods, and admins over the past few days. I believe this experience will highlight why I am hesitant to advocate for immediate full defederation from hexbear at this point in time, and am for now still more in favor of taking action on a more individual user basis. Please read and see how you feel about the situation afterwards.
Background
My first real contact with hexbear users was in the comments section of a post in this meta community requesting defederation from hexbear by @glimpythegoblin@lemm.ee. That post is now locked, because several hexbear users very quickly started doing the aforementioned “for the lulz” type spamming of meme images in the comments (these are actually just emojis, but they are rendered as full-size images on all instances other than the source instance, due to a current Lemmy bug).
I did not want to take further actions in that thread in general (for archival purposes), but I did take one action, which in retrospect was a mistake: I removed a comment which contained the hammer and sickle symbol. I ignorantly associated this symbolism with Kremlin propaganda, and the atrocities my own people suffered at the hands of the soviet union during the previous century. Many users (including hexbear users) correctly (and politely) pointed out to me in DMs that the symbol has a much broader use than just as the symbol of the USSR, and people elsewhere in the world may not associate it with the USSR at all. I am grateful for users who pointed this out to me without resorting to personal attacks.
Let me be clear here: while I do not have anything against leftism or communist ideas in general (in fact in today’s world, I think discussion of such ideas is quite necessary), Kremlin propaganda has no place on lemm.ee. Any dehumanizing talking points of the Kremlin on lemm.ee are treated as any other bigotry, and if communist symbolism is used in context of Kremlin propaganda (that is the context in which I have been exposed to it throughout my whole life), then it will still be removed. But there is no blanket ban on communist symbolism in general on lemm.ee, and discussing and advocating for leftist and communist topics (as distinct from the imperialist and dehumanizing policies of the Kremlin) is certainly allowed on lemm.ee.
Hexbear user response
Coming back to the events of the past few days: soon after my removal of the comment containing the symbol from the meta thread, two posts popped up on hexbear. One was focused on insulting and spreading lies about me personally. Another was focused on diminishing the horrors of the soviet occupation in my country. In the comments under both of these posts (and in a few other threads on hexbear), I noticed some seriously disturbing bigotry against my people. There were comments which reflected the anti-Estonian propaganda of the current Russian state, things like:
- Suggesting that my people has no right to exist
- Stating that my people (and other Baltic nations) are subhuman
- Claiming that anybody critical of both nazi and soviet occupations is themselves a nazi and a holocaust denier
I expect to hear such statements from the Russian state - here in Estonia, we are subjected to this and other kinds of bigotry constantly from Russian media - but to see it spread openly in non-Russian channels is extremely disturbing. Such bigotry is completely against lemm.ee rules in general. Additionally, my identity is public information, because I feel it’s important for the integrity of lemm.ee that I don’t hide behind anonymity. Considering this, I’m sure you can understand why I am very worried about my own safety when people leave comments in many unrelated threads (where my original posts are not even visible), baselessly calling me a nazi and a holocaust denier.
Note that the goal of this post is not to start a new debate in the comments about the the repressions of the soviet union in Estonia or other occupied territories, but if the topic interests any users, I can recommend the 2006 documentary The Singing Revolution (imdb). The trailer is a bit cheesy, but the actual film contains lots of historical footage from the soviet occupation, and also many interviews with people who experienced it, who share stories which are deeply familiar to all Estonians. If anybody is interested in further discussion, then I suggest making a post about it in the Estonian community here: !eesti@lemm.ee.
Hexbear admin response
After the above events had played out, I reached out to hexbear admins for clarification on their moderation policies and how they handle such cases. I was actually very happy with their response:
- They immediately removed the personal attacks and dehumanizing comments containing Kremlin propaganda from Hexbear, and assured me that such content is always handled by mods
- They told me that while there are all kinds of leftists on hexbear, Russian disinformation is generally either refuted in comments or removed by mods
- They implemented some additional rules on hexbear to try and reduce the trolling experienced by many other instances, including ours: https://hexbear.net/post/352119
My personal take-aways
Let me play the devil’s advocate here and employ some “self-whataboutism”: among all users that have been banned on lemm.ee for bigotry, the majority were actually not users from other instances, and in fact people with lemm.ee accounts. If we judge any larger instance only by bigoted posts that some of its users make, then we might as well declare all instances as cesspools and close down Lemmy completely. I believe it’s far more useful to judge instances based on moderation in response to such content. Just as we remove bigoted content from lemm.ee, I have also witnessed bigoted content being removed from hexbear.
At the same time, I am aware of some internal conflict between hexbear users over the more strict moderation they are now starting to employ, and I am definitely keeping an eye on that situation and how admins handle it.
I am also still quite worried about the amount of distinct users on hexbear who have posted Kremlin propaganda. I so far don't have reason to believe that these users are employed by the Russian state, but the fact that they are spreading the same hateful content which can be seen on Russian television seems problematic to say the least, and it remains to be seen if moderators can truly keep up with such content.
Where thing stand right now
I am not convinced that we are currently at a point where the “last resort” of defederation is necessary. This is based on the presumption that our moderation workload at lemm.ee will not get out of hand just due to users from that particular instance. My current expectation is that as the excitement of federation calms down (and as new rules on hexbear go into effect), the currently relatively high volume of low effort trolling will be replaced by more thoughtful posts. If this is not the case then we will certainly need to re-evaluate things.
Additionally, nothing is changing about our own rules regarding bigotry. Especially relevant in the context of Kremlin propaganda, I want to say that dehumanizing anybody is not allowed on lemm.ee (hopefully I do not have to spell it out, but this of course includes Ukrainians, LGBT folks, and others that the Kremlin despises), and action will be taken against any users who do this, regardless of what instance they are posting from.
Finally, I am very interested to hear thoughts and responses from our own users. I am super grateful to anybody who actually took the time to read through this massive dump of my own thoughts, and I am very interested to get a proper understanding of how our users feel about what I’ve written here. Please share any thoughts in the comments.
Yeah, I generally agree with your stance on it, which is a little bit of a change from previously, but more so understanding better what was already there.
My main problem with their instance is the sub-group of more antagonistic and condescending users, which have an overlap with the ones posting what you've described as "Kremlin propaganda".
Although said propaganda isn't quite exclusive to Russia, there's also Chinese propaganda stuff there too from what I can understand, which again has that same sort of overlap in users, if not the same users as the Russian propaganda sources.
Also, some of the culture of the instance is a bit off-putting, namely the allusions of sorts to pigs, but that could just be my Autism causing me to feel more offended by that than normal.
As it is, politically speaking, I'm not fond of Capitalism, I'm aware of the general historical problems of authoritarianism that have taken over what attempts at communism have been tried, and so I can agree with a decent amount of the views taken there.
But the pro-Russian stuff that shows up there is absolutely wild to me; a country so actively hostile to LGBTQIA+, and yet it's getting support from people in an instance that is inclusive to that same persecuted group? The same country that doesn't even appeal to their ideals of leftism and/or communism in modern day? And the same country that blatantly commits to violations of human rights? It doesn't make any logical sense.
So to your point, it's a moderation issue mainly, and an issue that actually is being addressed, so nicely done to the admins/moderators there for that, and well done to you for bringing that to attention here as well.
And hopefully as you've said, once people start getting used to the rules and connection to other instances, said antagonism, condescension, and trolling will reduce with time.
And apologies for the absolutely flowing sentences that go on for way longer than normal, I blame the Autism/ADHD, as it's closer to how I actually speak vocally. I try to space it out so it's more readable, and less of a wall of connected language that blurs together, especially for those who might have dyslexia.
I don't think an apology is necessary. You were completely comprehensible and there wasn't anything wrong with the way you expressed yourself. Conversations on Lemmy are informal and a lot of people write the way they speak. We're not composing academic papers here.
And I understand what you mean, it's just the years of sticking to grammatical rules to be "correct" when they feel so unnatural to how I actually hold conversations has had its effects on me.
Sure, in school I never got treated differently for having Autism/ADHD, but that was because it never became apparent, and my parents never believed I had either, because I was "too intelligent for that", despite the signs throughout my life, including my older sister and many of my friends being able to tell just from being around me.
And so after all that, I've started gradually opening up, and writing how I would speak, even if it's not "correct" as that learned grammar would want it to be. And so the apology is somewhat of a holding point to that grammatical formality I'm leaving behind.
Even half the periods I've typed here are still restraining myself from letting my "voice" keep going without pause, as I've gotten it into my head from those years that it's seen as "annoying" or some other negative attribute to do so.
Maybe I can clear up some of your concerns or confusion around the "pro-Russia" stuff if you'd like me to?
I've read through some of the replies within this post, and I think I'm gradually getting the idea behind it, though I'd gladly take a more direct explanation or summary.
My main concern is just with modern Russia's government, and its more regressive aspects, along with their actions within the war with Ukraine.
But I'll absolutely state I'm not very knowledgeable on a lot of the details behind it, aside from Russia's news putting out whatever they can to justify their actions to their population, but I'd take correction if that part is off course.
For a bit of additional context, I've been living with my parents who have since 2016 been going further and further off the deep end of right wing conspiracies about everything, and one of the things I often notice from those places is an unwavering support for modern Russia, partly or mostly for said regressive aspects.
So because of that, I do have a level of bias against Russia, but again, I'll take a look at other points of view regarding it.
There's a couple of different aspects to it but I'll try and outline it as simply and clearly as possible, without getting deep into specific topics.
As communists (and our anarchist comrades overlap although there's definitely differences) we're mostly 'internationalists'. We don't believe that the most meaningful conflicts are between nation states, but between the class interests of the proletariat (workers, ordinary people basically) and capital (the class that owns the means of production, finance etc). A supermarket worker in France has more in common, in terms of their place in society, with a shop worker in China then either have with the people who own the big businesses they work for.
As internationalists we're anti-imperialists and the largest imperial power and global hegemon (the state that dominates most of the world) today is undoubtedly the USA. While this remains the case, it will continue crushing any anti-capitalist or anti-imperialist movement across thr world, so we want to see their control weakened. This is often referred to as 'multipolarity' meaning that instead of a single country that dominates, there's at least space for multiple powers, which forces more compromise and allows more space for individual movements and nations to survive or even thrive.
This is why we'll often refer to having 'critical support' for nations or political movements that don't ascribe to our communist ideals (equality, workers owning the means of production, proletarian democracy etc). The "critical" bit is the most important. It's "critical" like 'criticism', not like 'essential'. States like Russia and China becoming less vulnerable to and dependent on the USA helps to weaken their global dominance. So while we loathe Russia's scapegoating and attacks on LGBTQ+ people and that they're a capitalist state, we believe it's in the international interest that the USA doesn't succeed in it's attempts to destroy (or severely weaken) them and consolidate their own power.
We also tend to be 'historical materialists' and believe that the economic and material interests of people's lives are what shape politics and societies, not idealism. So we don't put any stock in the idea that nations are defined by the personal traits of their leaders for example, but by economic and political pressures within and on the people in the country. So we see the idea that the war in Ukraine is because Putin is evil and craves power as rather silly, for example. The reasons (and for Ukraine's decisions, an all nations for that matter) are more complicated and practical than that. We don't like Putin - he's a cynical if successful, member of the ultra-rich capitalist class that was given free reign to loot Russia by the US after the fall of the Soviet Union - but we also don't think it matters very much.
Different communists (and our anarchist comrades with whom there's a lot of overlap, but obviously differences too) might disagree on the best approaches and to what degree we should focus on these conflicts at all, but generally the above remains true. It's important to know that it's not a zero sum game though, and solidarity with the working class around the world is still most important.
So the sentiment you'll find in some Hexbear users' critical support for Russia is that we want an end to the war sooner rather than later. Because this war is terrible for the working class on both sides. And because we don't see any compelling evidence that Ukraine can win, even with NATO support. We want both sides at the negotiating table rather than on the battlefield ideally, but if the conditions don't allow the two sides to do that then we hope they'll change as quickly as possible, because the longer this goes on the worse it gets all around. Some of us see Russia as being the most able to force the other side to the table, but obviously we'd prefer they just saw the realities of the situation and did it now.
We also get a lot of shock at the fact that some of us think, in that situation, Ukraine would have to give independence and security guarantees to the Donbas & Crimea. Many of us think that given the realities of the civil war there over the last 8 years or so, plus this conflict, it's probably the only way to prevent retributory ethnic cleansing in the region. It has nothing to do with ideas of fairness or sovereignty or any other nebulous concept; it's about what's least worst for the working class there.
Obviously there's a broad variety of views held to different degrees and I'm not speaking for every Hexbear user. Also, people being people, we all express ourselves differently, especially when dealing with heavy subjects. Some of us find consolation in understanding the chaos of it all, some obsess over details for the illusion of control, others have a dark sense of humour about it etc.
I know that's long, but I hope it's clear and I wanted to try and explain a complex way of looking at the world as simply as possible without just throwing out a lot of jargon and assumptions.
I'm going to type this response out as I read to get a better sense of understanding, and go back over after I've read it all.
I've known some friends of mine that are more anarchy leaning, so I get that to a degree already. And funnily enough, that right wing conspiracy stuff my parents are addicted to kind of feigns at class solidarity, but then they get too lost in their hatred of basically anything that isn't cis straight white Christians etc. and go back to fighting amongst themselves in some kind of spiritual war between themselves and the "Satanists" they've made up to label their "enemy", so not really any progress there.
Summarizing the second part in my sort of unfancy and simpler way, the US really needs to stop trying to be this "world police" that it thinks it is, especially given the problems within the country itself, and let more different countries work together through compromise to contribute to progress in the world.
Third part, essentially "it may not be the best possible option, but it can be a step in the right direction in some way, and it's way better than letting more power and control be centralized in one place".
Fourth, pretty much "economy and material for the people, along with the pressures within and without their country, define politics and society, not their leader's ideals".
Fifth, different people have different ideologies on what is exactly best and how much the conflict should be focused on, but generally based on the previous points, and on class solidarity most of all, which I can agree with.
Sixth, basically we want the war to end sooner so the people caught up in it don't have to keep suffering through it, which I absolutely agree with. Though I will say what might seem possible is for Putin to lose support from the I guess "upper" class, realizing it's not worth the losses and putting an end to it, though that's being optimistic considering it's the same class that has enabled it to continue. Otherwise, it would probably take a force neither side seems quite capable of to end the sort of ongoing stalemate.
Again, open to correction here, I've not been too focused on the progress of things there, so the situation could easily have changed since I kept up with it.
Seventh, I get the sort of idea to it, again, it's putting the best, or in this case, the least bad, for all the people involved over what would supposedly be "best" for the state and upper class, which totally makes sense in that regard, though I think I'm not quite getting the whole idea of the paragraph across on my end.
And the last one, just basically saying the exact specifics differ for everyone, of course people are people, and everyone expresses what they think in their own unique interpretation, sort of like how I'm interpreting all this here and now for a better understanding. And those interpretations all have their equally unique reasons behind them, usually for some form of comfort or knowledge, or just trying to find humor in even the darkest of things.
And the last bit, I think you did well, and given what I've typed, it seems to have gotten across pretty decently from what I can tell anyway.
Yeah, you're definitely getting the broad strokes of it (and I didn't give you much more than that). I get it's a lot to take in all at once too.
First part - yeah you get it and you can see clearly why that kind of false class that the right sometimes peddles to people like your parents is bullshit. It's not for the benefit of them, it helps the rich who fund that kind of media keep the working class divided and not United against them. That's why they have to invent enemies like Satanists or whatever. It's the same way capitalists have always tried to break strikes (and still do) by trying to drive a wedge between different ethnicities in the workforce. It's the same reason any real communist is so opposed to any form of bigotry, we're workers regardless of race, sexual orientation, gender etc.
Second part - you're right, but we'd argue it goes much further than just the usual invasions and interventions as 'the world's policeman'. Its about the coups, the assinations, funding disinformation, sanction regimes, IMF debt, the dollar as global currency and plenty more. They use dozens of methods to bend the world to their will and punish those who step out of line.
Third part - yeah, that's it. Or sometimes just "this is the best realistic option, because the others are worse".
Fourth part - Yep, got it again.
Fifth part - totally.
Sixth - yeah basically. There's various reasons we don't that think that upper class has the incentive or ability to, one of them being that capitalists from all sides make a massive amount of money on war - so it's good for them, but it's not worth getting into all of them here.
Seventh - even if you didn't get the meaning of all the details, you understand the basics just fine. What you said was right again.
And the end bit, you got it spot on. I'm really glad it was clear and understandable.
On the second part, I kind of said "world police" as a more broad generalizion of all the stuff the government does for the sake of simplicity, but elaborating helps for those unaware of the extent of it.
On the sixth part, I ended up not recalling that being a thing, but as you bring it up, yeah, something probably should be done about the upper class being able to profit from violence, as that profit helps nobody except those who don't need it, and encourages more violence for a cycle of more profit and violence.
And I'm glad I got it as well as I did, I really enjoy understanding different people's perspectives and the reasoning behind them.
No problem on part two. You got it, I just wanted to add some extra context too because obviously we'd been focused on wars with the Ukraine stuff.
I've enjoy it too, I appreciate you asking and taking the time to go through it all with me.
So what you're saying is that imperial powers should be able to send little green men into other countries, instigate astroturf civil wars, to break those countries apart, and then have those "independent" territories "democratically" join the imperialist aggressor nation.
And that we should let them get away with it. That we're supposed to tell Ukraine, the attacked party here, "No sorry the Russians are too good at weaselling and throwing rhetoric smoke grenades you're out of luck we won't help you".
Very leftist of you. Russia has been doing that shit for a near 700 years now.
See, this is a good example of exactly what I'm talking about. I get that it can seem shocking to people, especially if they're used to viewing a war as a simple good nation / bad nation dynamic, and that it's emotional. But if you're actually asking in good faith and just upset, I'll try to explain - although I also think you should go back and reread my comment above.
That bizarre generalisation is obviously not my position, as the rest of the post above makes clear.
I don't even know what this means. Russia still will have lost thousands of people, been isolated by the NATO-West, and suffered big economic blows. Beyond that, the sad reality is that countries almost always "get away" with waging war. What's the alternative, escalating it into a global conflict, nuclear war? How does that benefit the people of either side or anyone else?
Again, I don't really know what that means. It's a matter of dealing practically with the situation as it actually exists. How could those regions possibly immediately reintegrate into Ukraine? The Ukrainian government was shelling the Donbas for more than half a decade before the war even started, not to mention the far-right militias. Do you think the rhetoric or hate for Russian speaking people in those regions has reduced during this war, that those regions and the Ukrainian nationalists are closer to peace? Without security guarantees it'll be worse than before the war and very likely end in ethnic cleansing and the breaking of the Minsk agreements already demonstrates that the Ukrainian government can't or won't keep a lid on it.
Since you framed it as we won't help you I'm going to assume you're also in a NATO country like I am. Again, I ask you, what should we tell them? That there can be no peace and they have to fight Russia to the last Ukrainian? That retribution and likely ethnic cleansing against those regions is fine actually because of some arbitrary notion of national fairness?
Personally I'm not sure we should be telling them anything. It's pretty clear that foreign meddling helped create this war and derail peace talks earlier in the conflict. Like I said before, ideally I want Russia and Ukraine sat at the negotiating table, both begrudgingly settling on a deal that's best for everybody - meaning ordinary people, not the egos of nation states.
How does caving in and giving the Russian Empire what it desires benefit people? It's telling Russia "sure, go ahead, what you're doing is fine, do it as often as you want". "Pacifism is if I get to kick you and you don't defend yourself".
The Ukrainian government was shelling Russian military positions after the invasion started, in 2014, with little green men and putting criminals into power as viceroys who then forced people into military service against their will. Yes, I'm from a NATO country. No, it's not the US, I live two doors down from Ukraine so to speak. Just have to drive through Poland. I shared lecture hall benches with Ukrainians, had Ukrainian colleagues, now I have refugee Ukrainian neighbours. Ordinary people. Similar to Russians in many regards, more similar than other Slavic people I mean, but distinct in at least two important ways: a) They're not fatalist and b) No empire-grade nationalism. In that regard they're Poles it's no accident that the starting lines of their anthems are so similar.
You know nothing about Ukraine. The Ukrainian army speaks Russian, FFS!
Russian language and Russian culture is one thing, Russian state politics, imperialism, and kleptocratic mob rule another. Though there's plenty of Ukrainian kids who now refuse to speak Russian even though it's their native language and can you blame them.
I would advocate for things like the US to stop pussyfooting about and deliver ATACMS to bring a quicker end to the war. Russia lost the war within the first couple of days only issue is Ukraine didn't win yet either because the Russians have first to be convinced that they, indeed, lost the war. Differing expectations, lines on maps etc. and one big part of that is that with the US being indecisive as it is, and Russia thinking that the whole west is controlled by the US, Russia thinks they just have to hold out a bit longer and when the US loses interest then it's going to order its vassals in Europe to stop supplying Ukraine.
Of course, no such thing would happen. As an European I can tell you that the US can fuck off if it wants to we can deal with this stuff on our own but this "middle of the road" position is actively hurting Ukrainians as it's giving a morale boost to the Kremlin.
Where does this notion of "Ukraine is doing ethnic cleansing" coming from? Things like laws to promote Ukrainian as lingua franca of Ukraine while at the same time being in full compliance with the ECRML? On the flipside, Russia has been trying to eradicate the Ukrainian language and national identity since Catherine the Great. Of course, to the Russian nationalist any language but Russian being the lingua Franca in Ukraine is abhorrent. Why should they learn another language!... they're just as bad as Anglos in that regard.
"Meddling" from the European side consists of saying "Sure, there's a way to EU membership for you". And Ukrainians wanted that, and Yanukovic betrayed them on that, send out hired thugs and Berkut (pretty much the definition of "bastar cop") to deal with people who didn't like him trying to turn the country into an autocracy. Then he fled to his masters in Russia and the little green men invasion started.
Talk with Ukrainians. Ask them whether Russia can be negotiated with, and they're going to say "yes -- after they've been kicked out of the country, we can talk about reparations and lifting of sanctions". The Ukrainian people, no matter their native tongue, are not willing to give an inch of territory. And why should they.
There's another option to kicking the Russians out, and that's for the Russians to leave on their own accord, in one way or the other. Puting ordering a retreat is very unlikely as that would endanger regime stability. It happening otherwise is... well, the dynamics are very hard to predict but let's just say that the Russian defence ministry doesn't exactly have a stellar record when it comes to handling the payroll.
Because it brings an end to the war. And an end to the civil war. And depending on what's negotiated in exchange (NATO membership, EU membership etc), secures Ukraine against further escalation or Russian invasion.
I was clearly referring the current war, which Russia refers to as the SMO and western press as the 'invasion of Ukraine' or the 'Ukraine war'. Saying the formal war actually started with Russian interference in the Donbas and Crimea opens up all sorts of other cans of worms - if it was an act of war, why wasn't war declared, how could the SMO by an unprompted invasion if they were already at war, how was the 2014 coup not similar interference etc etc. I don't think it's a useful framing except to defend the attacks on the Donbas regions.
This is totally fair and it was extremely lazy and inaccurate framing on my part. Let's not pretend that use of Russian (and other, minority languages) isn't an issue though. There was the 2017 education law, which was widely condemned, and was at least improved upon. The 2019 Lviv ban on Russian language cultural products.The national 2019 Ukrainian language law which has been widely criticised. And since then there's been the banning of Russian books and music. I'm glad you think "the Russian language and culture is one thing", I do too, but clearly a significant portion of thr Ukrainian state has issues with it that go a lot further than just that Ukraine should speak more Ukrainian (which I don't have a problem with for what it's worth).
That's clearly not the extent of it though and doesn't take into account the meddling of the US or the UK (which might as well be the US at this point). Theres about 20 years of US proxy orgs meddling, EU meddling (which sometimes conflicted with the US) for economic gain, the US support and funding for the 2014 coup, predatory IMF-loans, foreign capital's insistence on eliminating worker protections and stripping the copper wire out of the walls of Ukraine, or UK/US pressure on the 2022 peace talks.
You see, here's where we just fundamentally disagree. That framing might feel nice, it may even be the case on the basis of whatever your hopes that they accomplish are, but the war is still going on because the reality is that the war is still going on.
You seem to think Russia being entirely driven out of Ukraine's borders is inevitable and I don't, probably the opposite in fact. And I don't think that one more weapon system, just like all the others before it, is going to change the outcome. Especially when the US in particular, and therefore NATO more generally, seems to be signalling a reduction in enthusiasm and support. I live in Europe too and some European nations might continue there support, but there's no denying that they're more dependent on the US than they were before this conflict.
Ultimately though, my point remains the same. This war overwhelmingly hurts the working class. Of Ukraine, of Russia, of separatist regions, of the countries fighting this war by proxy, of the countries being squeezed by related sanctions, and of the countries whose vital trade has been effected. As I made clear in my original post:
I'll leave it there for now as this isn't what this thread is about. I was asked to explain some of the thinking behind some Hexbear comments and I have. I clarified my opinion for you, because you obviously put a lot of effect into your response to me and I thought you deserved a reply.
Whatever happens with federation and so on I hope you enjoy the rest of your time here on Lemmy.
It would mean Taiwan is next. And various other small neigbours of medium-sized states in unstable regions of the world. "Hey nobody seems to care so let's go for it".
Which 2014 coup? Did you see any NATO troops on the ground? NATO weapons? There were a handful of politicians and diplomats from NATO states trying to negotiate compromises (and failing), does that constitute armed aid, now?
Why wasn't war declared back then? Russia still hasn't declared war. And I tell you why: Because that'd be unpopular in Russia. It would mean universal conscription.
And even with all that neolib shit (which I didn't care to mention as it's not directly connected) Ukrainians wanted to join the EU. None of that stuff was covert or corrupt, btw.
One weapon system no, I'm singling out ATACMS not because they would give a completely new capability to Ukraine (they have long-range strike capabilities), but because the US is sitting on half a gazillion of those and Ukraine could really, really, use more of that kind of capability to strike into the Russian rear -- hitting logistics, command posts, artillery, pretty much everything that NATO would hit from the air in a similar situation. It would make a real difference to the duration of the war because the defensive structures Russia built can't be overcome while under artillery fire. Mine sweepers don't move quickly they're pretty much sitting ducks, bulldozers to flatten moats neither.
Ukrainians are going to go on with or without ATACMS, gnawing away at that line until there's a breakthrough. Their losses are quite small doing that, btw, precisely because unlike Russia they actually care about the lives of their soldiers.
And this whole "counteroffensive has failed" talk is kinda -- west-east propaganda? Ukrainian generals have said from the beginning, in crystal clear terms, that this is going to take ages because they don't have enough materiel to do it quickly. The west was expecting more, and Russia played into that by declaring the offensive failed as soon as probing attacks began. Yeah they were probes of course they didn't break through that'd be rather embarrassing for the Russian side.
...so you hope that Ukraine will be given ATACMS and whatever else it needs to bring Russia to a position where they have to negotiate. Alternatively, that Putin kicks the bucket and is replaced maybe not by someone nicer, but at least by someone sufficiently isolationists. But it could as well be a Z patriot tripling down on the conflict that's why pining for regime change isn't really a good idea, I'm quite sure the SBU could already have had Putin in the crosshairs if they thought it was a good idea: You need to destroy the myth, not the man. Destroy only the man and the myth only becomes stronger.
This was such a respectful exchange, and this is why i've deeply enjoyed hexbear on my respective instance.
From what i've seen, some of the "worst" offenders are often in response or in challenge to uncritical and hostile comments from posters toward "tankies" and other pejoratives, and while I am by no means defending the big poop balls and such, I can at least respect the ones that are in response to outright hostility toward their point of view. As others from their instance have already explained, a lot of what comes across as blanket support for oppressive regimes is really a more nuanced and well-reasoned support for socialist projects (Modern Russia excluded ~~(usually)~~) and acknowledgement of the hostile response from global liberal superpowers. Of course I myself could be misunderstanding, but that's what i've gathered so far from reading.
Anyone who implied Modern Russia is a socialist project would be mocked ruthlessly.
Thank you, I caveat-ed that just to hedge against exchanges I may have forgotten or not seen, but I feel confident now that I haven't seen that kind of sentiment.
That more nuanced reasoning was what I was noticing from that reading replies I mentioned.
And I'm not certain on it, but I have a feeling generally being more direct with expressing that support as being specifically for the positive things that came from those places, rather than what might look to an outsider as broad and without nuance support for those places as a whole, might do better.
People often have flaws with them, and understanding nuance is a common point of lacking for many. Especially when some people might say the same thing but without that nuance, or in some cases, the opposite of it entirely.
In my attempt to be as charitable as possible, I can empathize that many people are not as thoughtful as you're proving to be. There's a veritable gulf between the nuanced understanding of global politics hexbear seems to have, and the un-detailed narratives many westerners (myself undeniably included) tend to accept unscrupulously, and crossing that gulf is sometimes just not worthwhile if it's obvious it will not be received well.
Speaking for myself, I have definitely enjoyed dunking on reactionary nutjobs on the internet. I am sure those interactions could never have changed their minds, but I only have so much patience and some people (honestly) just aren't worth the effort.
I also just wanted to add a note to say I'm really sorry you've had to deal with that issue with your parents. I'm no stranger to having difficult and suddenly susceptible family members to the well-funded barrage of reactionary content that's aimed at them.
Also, thought I'd comment from here for this, but I've surprisingly adjusted pretty well despite all that I've been through. My main struggle recently has been dealing with stress from it, and the Autism and ADHD not making that any easier on me.
But overall, I'm proud of myself, I've continued going through something as horrible as all this and still keep bettering myself despite it all.
Yeah, that sounds doubly tough. But it sounds like you're absolutely right to be proud of yourself!
I only recently managed to convince the more reasonable and less religious of my two parents that it's pretty likely I have Autism and ADHD, given the extensive amount of signs of it throughout my life.
Though the rest of "me" I've had to keep hidden unless I want the more religious and less reasonable one of them to have a field day due to their regressive beliefs. Because, you know, being a Autistic ADHD Asexual Aromantic sort-of-gender Apathetic Furry, (I'm probably missing something here) or AAAA as I sometimes comedically shorten it to, doesn't exactly line up with their ideals about many things.
Yeah I bet not. Any one of those things can get tough, especially with that kind of parent. I'm glad you've made some progress though and I hope it helps. I know it probably doesn't mean much from an internet stranger, but I'm rooting for 'ya.
If you're offering to explain the perspectives behind those sentiments I'd be interested to better understand.
If context is helpful, I'm somewhere left of centrist, and generally abhore the Russian and Chinese governments. I tend to be socially progressive, and anti-authoritarian, but my perspectives in other political arenas are less well formed
I commented below. I hope you don't mind me just pointing you there because it's a long post and I don't want to clog the thread too much.
Thanks for sharing your perspectives, I can't say I agree with you on quite everything (though I do agree with the majority), but I appreciate your explaining how you and others see the world. Thanks for sharing your thoughts :)
Link for those who might be looking for his comment https://hexbear.net/comment/3765816
Edit: if anyone knows how to link to the comment in an instance agnostic way I'd be interested to know about it :)
No worries, you're welcome.
(And yeah, I didn't link because I wasn't sure about that either)
Lol, yeah as much as I love the fediverse there are definitely some interesting implications to the way it all works
Have a good one!
They're called tankies after the people who supported Soviet tanks crushing any kind of revolt in Hungary and Czechoslovakia. They think that all the negative stuff about Russia, et al. is just Western propaganda. Most leftists, including me, want nothing to do with them.
I'm aware of that definition, but from the conversation I've had here with someone from Hexbear, I wouldn't jump to quite that overgeneralization, as clearly that isn't the universal view from there.
I don't entirely doubt there's the possibility that some people there might think more like that, but it's a group within the overall group, and seemingly one that is looked down upon by others there.
Though bringing that up, that does give me curiosity as to how a sort of broad poll on how Russia is viewed, specifically whether with or without nuance, would go there, as it might help sort out that exact problem of if it's a minority there that believes Russia is entirely right or not.
The reason being for it being a sort of poll, is it would be significantly easier to put numbers or percentages to the result there, and being far more generally accessible, rather than discussions and replies that would be hard to really count accurately due to the sheer number of users.
Of course, that might not work, but it brings the discussion to the topic of what might clear things up more, and that seems like a step in the right direction I'd think.