Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

An_Old_Big_Tree wrote

The username involved isn't acceptable, I've just been waiting a bit before banning them so they are easier to recognise when they come back.

3

ziq wrote (edited )

Is that username really any worse than this one?

/u/BernieSanders

or this one

/u/lenin_1917

or this one

/u/josefStallman (a combo of joe stalin and richard stallman)

3

An_Old_Big_Tree wrote

Because national anarchists are fash, and historically that's where we've drawn the line.

Perhaps I'm not realising something?

3

ziq wrote (edited )

I'm not convinced they know what a national 'anarchist' is. I think they're using the term jokingly the way anarchists use 'anarcho-monarchist'.

2

GrimWillow wrote

It's not as obvious a joke as "anarcho-monarchism" because people could find the mixture more palatable to their uninformed views of both Anarchism and nationalism

Also just banned u/TrumpPence2020 for their username.

2

ziq wrote

how do reactionaries care so much about this site, I don't get it. We don't go to voat to hang out with them

3

An_Old_Big_Tree wrote

Pretty sure we allow liberal usernames around here, why the ban?

3

GrimWillow wrote

It was 10 minutes after they made it, and I see a promotion of "Trump/Pence" as a promotion of right wing politics. In the context of the thread, I figured it might be a good case for an inappropriate name.

2

ziq wrote (edited )

They're crowing about that ban over on notabug.

https://notabug.io/t/raddle

Can only assume getting banned gives them some kind of a high.

4

GrimWillow wrote (edited )

It says they only ban fascists.

trumpism is fascism.

I knew this would stir up those clowns. And what they describe is "non-commie" names get banned, lol. Yep, that's why I banned it, because it's "non-commie", nothing to do with trumpism support right in the username. I guess banning pro hitler names would create the same "OMG THEY HATE NON-COMMIES BECAUSE THEY HATE HITLER".

They should get over it. The loss of an account named "TrumpPence2020" after 10 minutes of creation isn't the end of this person's life, especially since they can just make a new account. What a horrible fate! Evil admin!!

4

ziq wrote

My only concern is it prob encourages them to keep testing you.

2

GrimWillow wrote

They've been ramping up whether we do this stuff or not. We've been banning usernames for a while.

Sure, it's a trump supporter rather than a pro neo-nazi username, but fuck trump, and fuck anyone that would want that name...

2

magpie_0 wrote

dam I thought this was a freer version of Reddit, I don't agree with trump though I don't see the point in banning people over supporting him.

1

GrimWillow wrote (edited )

It's not like I IP banned them, they can easily just make a new account. Shutting down a 10 minute old account with 0 activity is more like saying "uhh, no, choose a different name" than "banning" really...

1

[deleted] wrote (edited )

0

ziq wrote (edited )

He does support Bernie Sanders, he's a liberal. It's not a joke at all.

Sanders has used his position in the US gov to support both Israeli and Saudi imperialism/genocide, including voting to support the 2014 bombing of the Gaza Strip that killed countless women and children.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2014/07/24/why-did-bernie-sanders-get-gaza-so-wrong/

https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident/comments/3z54vz/why_did_bernie_sanders_vote_to_support_israel/

also the person this whole thread is about actually claims their username is in jest (unlike u/berniesanders). I think it's a shitty joke and they should change the name, but haven't seen any indication they're actually a nationalist.

Edit: /u/JosefStallman the founder of f/freeasinfreedom was a Marxist-Leninist-Maoist. Mao was directly responsible for millions of deaths more than once.

2

ziq wrote

There are people here that literally support Stalin, so idk why we'd draw the line at their username.

2

[deleted] wrote

2

ziq wrote (edited )

I think leninists/stalinists are more frustrating to us than a lot of other capitalist ideologues because they appropriate our words (the same way ancaps do) and use them towards their authoritarian, nationalist, imperialist and genocidal ends. State-capitalists have basically destroyed the word 'communism' forever; the same way certain free-market capitalists destroyed 'libertarian' and are chipping away at 'anarchism'. But their politics are no worse than any other liberal's, it's just more annoying to us because by posing as radicals, they do damage to our movements by associating us with tyrannical capitalists.

But I don't think people should be banned from here for being a free market capitalist or a state capitalist, even the ones trolling radicals by appropriating our terminology, because then the site would be closed to 99.9999 percent of the population.

As long as tankies are not using raddle to promote their beloved dictator idols and making excuses for the enslaving and murdering of 'kulaks' (peasants), anarchists, and LGBTQ people, I don't think the admins should get involved.

The entire userbase of f/shoplifting likely adhere to pro-capitalist ideologies that have enslaved, displaced and slaughtered generations of people, and every non-reptile animal species on the planet is about to go extinct because of both state (China, USSR) and free-market (USA, Europe) capitalism... But banning everyone from that forum for liking capitalism, and closing the doors to 99.99999% of humanity wouldn't affect anything. We'd still be in the midst of the most rapid mass-extinction event in history. We'd still be fucked.

5

Hyolobrika wrote

I'm curious, how are leninism and stalinism capitalist?

3

sudo wrote

They aren't, anarchists just like to call anyone they don't like "capitalist" or "fascist", even when they're not.

0

ziq wrote

Always fun when "nooo he only killed 10 million of his people, not 40 million! Praise Chairman Mao and his divine sacrifices for the party!" decides they're the arbiter of what makes a capitalist / fascist.

1

martasultan wrote

So, seems you guys don't get it (had 3 or 4 downvotes when I commented this). Familiar with the Holodomor and Aardakh? Kronstadt or Makhno? Article 121?

Literally made being gay illegal w/ forced labour as a punishment.

Oh- or the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, when they literally split Europe between their totally-not-an-empire and literally Nazi Germany.

1

ziq wrote

You wanna maybe explain how state capitalism isn't state capitalism?

0

[deleted] wrote

1

ziq wrote

The reason the phrase 'white supremacy' is used and the word 'racism' isn't used in the content policy is because of people like this that insist poc being rude to white people is 'racist'.

A lot of the r/anarchism mods on reddit pull that shit, even using it to ban poc for being rude to them, so when I wrote the content policy here, I was very careful with the wording so that brocialists wouldn't be able to use our policies to support their shitty agendas.

With nationalism, there are again a lot of white anarchists that attack black people who are struggling to overcome centuries of colonialism and gain independence from global powers by establishing an independent nation state. I'd personally trust one of these 'black nationalists' over a white anarchist 9 times out of 10.

2

ziq wrote (edited )

To be clear, I'm not a nationalist in any way shape or form, but I understand why people surrounded by white sharks would feel compelled to create borders to keep the sharks at bay.

White anarchists are hypocrites for attacking Global South people for not being pure enough while they lay back and enjoy all the spoils that came from centuries of colonialism.

I've seen way too many white anarchists dogpile on poc that have no choice but to establish a state to protect themselves from bloodthirsty colonialists that will pounce on any 'stateless' land (like is happening with the Kurds right now).

4

[deleted] wrote

1

ziq wrote (edited )

Yeah. White anarchists don't have the problems people in the global south have because they're protected by their powerful white-supremacist states that are busy cannibalizing everyone in the global South. Colonizers really shouldn't be lecturing the colonized about anything.

Being able to establish an anarchist society is kind of a privilege in of itself because it means you're in a position to dictate the course of global society i.e. your culture is already powerful enough that you can say "okay rest of the world, we're done with states and capital now, time to declare anarchy. Don't invade us tho, because it's time for global peace now that we've bombarded everyone else into submission and taken all the world's resources for ourselves, k?"

2

sudo wrote

Stalinists aren't fascists.

−1

martasultan wrote

Yeah, they're not at all like fascists. They wouldn't launch imperialist wars, commit genocide, persecute LGBT people, or anything like that. They're true anti-imperialist comrades.

2

martasultan wrote (edited )

So, seems you guys don't get it (had 3 or 4 downvotes when I commented this). Familiar with the Holodomor and Aardakh? Kronstadt or Makhno? Article 121?

Literally made being gay illegal w/ forced labour as a punishment.

Oh- or the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, when they literally split Europe between their totally-not-an-empire and literally Nazi Germany.

3

GaldraChevaliere wrote

I try to give the benefit of the doubt with stupid names. It's not like the stupid ones last all that long before showing their hand, and I've seen just as shitty behavior over longer periods of time from 'legit' people. Remember Connie?

2

[deleted] wrote

1

GaldraChevaliere wrote

I'm saying I don't feel like violating someone's autonomy for something like KGBGoon420, but the shitters weed themselves out in a matter of minutes. Nobody who actually wants to participate is gonna name themselves XxCoonTown13XX, but the ones that pull that shit to begin with have zero impulse control and get themselves nuked within a day at most, but like yeah, we should be blasting them on the spot anyway. I just don't think that basic level of standards needs to be enshrined, it's something that's already getting done.

What I'm more worried about is another idiot faction war like we had when the transhumanists lost their pretty little heads over primitivists and really just anyone with ecological concerns at all existing on the site, and some stupid conflict like that hiding behind policies to get away with it. Like, the first part of my name is a direct reference to my religious beliefs, which are unfortunately co-opted to a pretty large degree by racists. I'd bet a bj if some fedora had any awareness of religions that aren't abrahamic they'd try to pull some "see see it's a dog whistle" shit with it.

3

[deleted] wrote

0

GaldraChevaliere wrote

It isn't, the point I'm getting across is that by enshrining rules we already consider a matter of courtesy/decency, we open ourselves to some de jure bullshit. With formalized systems of law/policy as opposed to the consensus decisions we've been making, we get situations like what Ziq described where people try to shut down criticism through policy instead of actually sorting out their beef, and overwhelmingly the bureaucratic types will be the ones taking advantage of it as a way of punishing opposition.Guess what large cohort of our userbase are heavy into bureaucracy.

4

ziq wrote (edited )

Completely agree. Bureaucracy is used to destroy radical movements by creating new power hierarchies that prop up the bureaucrats; who then purge all dissenters that threaten their grip on power. Like when r/socialism banned catgirls. Or when Lenin branded the people who fought the Russian revolution 'counter-revolutionaries' and had them all shot so he could establish his vanguard dictatorship unopposed.

3

ziq wrote (edited )

I think they make a good point. Reminds me of when a brocialist tried to ban brocialistslaughter; claiming the username was offensive to them because it was 'sexist'.

2