So in the end, that means he’s accusing me of being a typical redditor, trying to make “a reddit” out of Lemmy?
I’m not sure I know what that means, I’m just saying what I’m thinking. As far as I know, I don’t have a particular agenda, especially not trying to change Lemmy, I’m just trying to participate in what I see. I’m interested in what I see here, however with my current understanding, it seems like I’m just not seeing what everyone else seems to be seeing.
In the most direct terms I can give you, Israel lies more often and is the greater aggressor. To equate them is to make Israel seem better than they are, even if the exact words you’re saying is “both sides are lying.” It’s a false equivalency that trivializes the bad guys and muddles the whole situation. It’s punching down.
It’s similar to saying all lives matter in response to black lives matters. It’s an otherwise harmless statement that in context expresses a malicious political leaning. In this case, saying one cannot trust Israel nor Palestine is ignoring Israel’s historical context and the struggle of Palestinians.
Imagine if I said both slaves and slave owners are spreading unreliable narratives about slavery. That would be malicious, wouldn’t it?
It’s because this is the excuse and cop-out you see thousands of times when you’re a communist dealing with liberals. When liberals are eventually forced to confront that their sources lie about a particular topic, they don’t admit they were wrong and adjust their behavior to think critically about those sources in the future. They throw their hands up and go “Draw game. If my source is wrong then yours can’t be right. You didn’t win. Everybody has a bias, you can’t trust any government.” and then 2 weeks later they’ll send you the same source to tell you why China bad.
In that sense I understand. I didn’t get this exact vibe from this post, but with context I see how it could be. I just wouldn’t assume by default that that’s what the person that made this post is about, though it’s definitely possible.
?
I’m not familiar with Hexbears images, how they are used and what they mean.
Lemmy + Redditor (Usually democrat-aligned, but also somewhat orientalist and hawkish in a modern sense)
We use this to refer to Lemmy.world, who tries to make a new Reddit out of Lemmy, a Marxist Leninist-adjacent federation of communities…
So in the end, that means he’s accusing me of being a typical redditor, trying to make “a reddit” out of Lemmy?
I’m not sure I know what that means, I’m just saying what I’m thinking. As far as I know, I don’t have a particular agenda, especially not trying to change Lemmy, I’m just trying to participate in what I see. I’m interested in what I see here, however with my current understanding, it seems like I’m just not seeing what everyone else seems to be seeing.
In the most direct terms I can give you, Israel lies more often and is the greater aggressor. To equate them is to make Israel seem better than they are, even if the exact words you’re saying is “both sides are lying.” It’s a false equivalency that trivializes the bad guys and muddles the whole situation. It’s punching down.
It’s similar to saying all lives matter in response to black lives matters. It’s an otherwise harmless statement that in context expresses a malicious political leaning. In this case, saying one cannot trust Israel nor Palestine is ignoring Israel’s historical context and the struggle of Palestinians.
Imagine if I said both slaves and slave owners are spreading unreliable narratives about slavery. That would be malicious, wouldn’t it?
Now I understand, thank you :)
No prob. Feel free to ask us anything in good faith
It’s because this is the excuse and cop-out you see thousands of times when you’re a communist dealing with liberals. When liberals are eventually forced to confront that their sources lie about a particular topic, they don’t admit they were wrong and adjust their behavior to think critically about those sources in the future. They throw their hands up and go “Draw game. If my source is wrong then yours can’t be right. You didn’t win. Everybody has a bias, you can’t trust any government.” and then 2 weeks later they’ll send you the same source to tell you why China bad.
In that sense I understand. I didn’t get this exact vibe from this post, but with context I see how it could be. I just wouldn’t assume by default that that’s what the person that made this post is about, though it’s definitely possible.