I saw a post that talked about racism towards people and when I talked about it the response I got was very heated and a person even called lemmy.world a community of ‘hitlerites’

I have been around for a week or so and this is my first time seeing such explicit vulgar reaction towards another community, is this a one-off or should I block hexbear?

  • Sootius
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Anarchists are explicitly welcome, so authoritarianism is definitely not a requirement. And what “alternative facts”?

    • Lumelore (She/her)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Things like the denial of the tiananmen square massacre or claiming that North Korea is a free and prosperous nation, both of which I have seen with my own two eyes on hexbear.

      While I am not an anarchist, generally I am cool with them. Who I am not cool with are Marxist-Leninists, which are authoritarian.

      From the wikipedia article on Marxist-Leninists:

      In the words of historians Silvio Pons and Robert Service, elections are “generally not competitive, with voters having no choice or only a strictly limited choice”. Generally, when alternative candidates have been allowed to stand for election, they have not been allowed to promote very different political views.

      • The people of the soviet union, at least as far as Pat Sloan experienced in ~1937, had the most limited choice: any person

          I have, while working in the Soviet Union, participated in an election. I, too, had a right to vote, as I was a working member of the community, and nationality and citizenship is no bar to electoral rights. The procedure was extremely simple. A general meeting of all the workers in our organization was called by the trade union committee, candidates were discussed, and a vote was taken by show of hands. Anybody present had the right to propose a candidate, and the one who was elected was not personally a member of the Party. In considering the claims of the candidates their past activities were discussed, they themselves had to answer questions as to their qualifications, anybody could express an opinion, for or against them, and the basis of all the discussion was: What justification had the candidates to represent their comrades on the local Soviet?
          As far as the elections in the villages were concerned, these took place at open village meetings, all peasants of voting age, other than those who employed labour, having the right to vote and to stand for election. As in the towns, any organization or individual could put forward candidates, anyone could ask the candidate questions, and anybody could support or oppose the candidature. It is usual for the Communist Party to put forward a candidate, trade unions and other organizations can also do so, and there is nothing to prevent the Party’s candidate from not being elected, if he has not sufficient prestige among the voters.

        Pat Sloan, Soviet Democracy: Chapter XIII

        • Lumelore (She/her)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          17 minutes ago

          Several things in there I dislike:

          Raising hands does not seem like an accurate way vote. Peasants who employed labor couldn’t vote. People could vote even if they weren’t citizens. No mention of being able to vote for non-communists. There are trade-unions and other candidates but it doesn’t mention their political alignment