If you can point to one instance where i advocated for NATO, i’d be happy to provide an apology. Unfortunately this does not exist except in your mind where being against the Russian empire means siding with the western empire. I strongly recommend you do some reading on third-worldism and the importance of non-alignment (in regards to colonial empires) for the socialist/communist/anarchist movement worldwide.

Do you seek interest in publishing photos on Lemmy like this, since you call critics of current narrative “puppets of Russian Empire”?

Challenge accepted. I’m all up for denouncing nazism/fascism where it is. I just criticize when denouncing a specific brand of fascism is done in a way to reinforce another (whether it’s USA or Russian fascism/imperialism).

Not upvoting, not because the subject isn’t interesting, but because of the framing: “The great popular hero russia restores water to the poor victims of the ukrainian despotism”.

I’d be interested in more sources on the implications behind this. I’d also be interested if you were to publish the same kind of propaganda against Turkey’s war crimes against the autonomous communities of Rojava ;-)

I prefer having this filter rather than not having it, mostly because of the systemic effects I explained.

That’s also the case for me, in case that was not clear :)

I think some words are almost always meant to harm, and can be easily replace by more positive or neutral term.

I don’t think it’s that easy, because of the context. Should all usage of the n***** word by black people be prevented? Should all usage of w****/b**** words by queer/femmes folks in a sex-positive context be prevented? etc… I agree with you using these words is most times inappropriate and we can find better words for that, however white male technologists have a long history of dictating how the software can be used (and who it’s for) and i believe there’s something wrong in that power dynamic in and of itself. It’s not uncommon that measures of control introduced “to protect the oppressed” turn into serious popular repression.

Still, like i said i like this filter in practice, and it’s part of the reason i’m here (no fascism policy). As a militant antifascist AFK, i need to reflect on this and ponder whether automatic censorship is ok in the name of antifascism: it seems pretty efficient so far, if only as a psychological barrier. And i strongly believe we should moderate speech and advertise why we consider certain words/concepts to be mental barriers, but i’m really bothered on an ethical level to just dismiss content without human interaction. Isn’t that precisely what we critique in Youtube/Facebook/etc? I’m not exactly placing these examples on the same level as a slur filter though ;)

The devs explain here a clear intention to make this change difficult enough to prevent at least partially the migration of some communities they don’t want to support and/or give a platform to.

I’m happy it’s becoming harder for neonazis to find a home online, however i’m not happy that this makes lemmy english-centric, and i’m not happy that honest discussion about some topics (including thoughtful criticism) will be made harder.

Related example: on another message board a few weeks back i couldn’t post a message containing my criticism of “bitcoin” because bitcoin was part of the slur filter to filter out the crypto-capitalist clique… i understand and appreciate why it was put in place, but i felt really powerless as a user that a machine who lacks understanding of the context of me using this word, decided i had no right to post it. I appreciate strong moderation, but i don’t trust machine to police/judge our activities.

Well it depends what type of “communism” we’re talking about. Fascism has usually a pretty clear understanding: repression of political dissent, emphasis on a national feeling and a sense of unique destiny to destroy/conquer whoever disagrees, various forms of eugenism (in the sense of killing people because they’re homosexual or handicapped), the cult of work as a duty to your homeland, as in some cases also strong racism (to my knowledge this is not a feature of italian fascism, but rather other forms of nazism/fascism).

So now, what is communism? According to marxists and anarchists, communism is the stateless, peaceful, egalitarian society. However, marxists believe an intermediary step is required to reach communism: the dictatorship of the proletariat, which has led to countless deaths and suffering. So if “dictatorship of the proletariat” is your definition of communism, then i would almost agree with you “communism” is just as bad as “fascism”. However, there still are some differences:

• women’s rights (and often gay rights) are faring well under marxism-leninism ; that is, women are equal in their right to be exploited by the State
• most leninist regimes, despite their atrocities, are not known for putting forward racial theories and committing genocides (although Stalin in the USSR had quite some genociding on his hands)

So no, it’s not the same. And in any way, most people you will meet through life will talk about communism as the principle free and equal society. That is, the abolition of privileges (remember 1789?) and freedom and equality for all. In this anarchist understanding of communism, then really there’s nothing wrong with communism.

Free association + Mutual aid + Solidarity against domination = <3 Short introduction to anarchism i wrote in another topic