this post was submitted on 02 Nov 2024
79 points (85.6% liked)

Ye Power Trippin' Bastards

315 readers
12 users here now

This is a community in the spirit of "Am I The Asshole" where people can post their own bans from lemmy or reddit or whatever and get some feedback from others whether the ban was justified or not.

Sometimes one just wants to be able to challenge the arguments some mod made and this could be the place for that.

Rules

Expect to receive feedback about your posts, they might even be negative.

Make sure you follow this instance's code of conduct. In other words we won't allow bellyaching about being sanctioned for hate speech or bigotry.


Some acronyms you might see.


Relevant comms

founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS
 
  1. Mod of !anarchism@slrpnk.net posts a great Greta Thunberg quote, but then tries to use it to justify not voting in the upcoming US election
  2. Multiple people point out that’s very clearly not what she meant
  3. Removed by mod Removed by mod Removed by mod Removed by mod

Using your mod powers to decide who is allowed and not allowed to speak is not very anarchist of you, @mambabasa@slrpnk.net

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 3 points 2 weeks ago (14 children)

Here’s the mod log. IMO the OP already invited those comments (the post says in the first few lines that Trump is way more dangerous) and I don’t see how they were bludgeoning or hypocritical.

[–] poVoq 1 points 2 weeks ago (13 children)

Yes they didn't understand it either, but you have to keep in mind which community they commented in.

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 2 points 2 weeks ago (12 children)

Erm, which they are you referring to? Nobody's saying elections are better than anarchism, and as I've said below (on my alt account of the same name), I don't see how saying voting for Harris is better than voting for Stein contradicts election principles. It's not like Greta endorses Stein either.

[–] poVoq 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

There is a detailed body of theoretical works in Anarchism about how Electoralism is counter-productive and mostly just distracts from the real work that is needed. This isn't about Harris or Stein. Coming into an Anarchist community and arguing about the need to vote for a candidate is similar to coming to a Vegan community and starting to argue that eggs are better than meat and maybe a little meat is not so bad after all.

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I agree with this thread, which I saw a while ago.

Your can't un-spill a cup of water, but you can keep it upright.

Also, the electoralism wasn't out of nowhere. It was pretty much 1/4 of what the post was saying

[–] poVoq 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

You are again missing the point. No one claimed that you are not allowed to vote for the lesser evil if that is something you want to do.

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

But you should not be voting for the way-lesser evil are asking others to do so (perhaps while continuing to emphasize that the system will still be broken)? If that's what you're arguing, could we take this to where I've replied below so the overall argument is more public and easier to follow? thx

[–] poVoq 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Sorry, can you please rephrase or fix the grammar in your post above? I don't get what you are trying to say.

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

sorry, hopefully it'll make sense if you replace "are" with "or"

[–] poVoq 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

No that is not what I am arguing then. Voting for the lesser evil is often the right choice. If I was a citizen of the USA I would certainly vote for Harris tomorrow as the lesser evil, but that is a personal choice and I trust that most US based anarchists are sensible enough to do the same.

The main problem with electorialism is not the voting itself, its the spectacle around it and the waste of effort and money to promote the candidates and all the (self) gaslighting that people do. Coming to an anarchist space and doing that will at best get you ridiculed, but in this case the mod decided to show these people the door.

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

That’s an interesting argument I haven’t seen before.

While I obviously wouldn’t support anyone dumb enough to make a new post to explicitly promote a candidate, I think the mod basically egged these comments on in this case by going to great lengths to promote not voting for this specific candidate, thus feeding into the spectacle. I would understand if all such comparison of candidates was treated the same; however, that doesn’t seem to be the case here.

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Someone commented under the post, advocating for the Green Party, and the mod left it up but deleted and banned people who replied to that person and brought up the whole “impossible to overestimate the consequences” thing.

I didn’t do anything similar to what poVoq is claiming I did, as you’re pointing out. But the people who did do that, the mod left alone, banning people who objected.

I’m done litigating this at this point, but I did get tempted into coming back to point that one thing out.

Edit: Phrasing

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

ehhhh while it’s close, i wouldn’t call “I would not condemn anyone who refuses to vote for genocide” outright support for the green party

[–] PhilipTheBucket@ponder.cat 4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I was talking about:

Since it’s going to be shit either way, remember that getting Greens to the 5% threshold is attainable.

[–] Aatube@kbin.melroy.org 3 points 2 weeks ago

Oh, I didn’t see that one

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)