My first months on Lemmy were spent on Lemmy.world, which was the biggest instance at the time. I had no experience with Hexbear because .world had defederated that instance. I sometimes saw it being described as a "tankie" instance, but it was nothing specific.

After I moved to .zip, I came across !games@hexbear.net, which seemed to be free from anything overtly political and reminded me of r/Gamingcirclejerk, so I subscribed to it and occasionally made comments related to gaming.

Today I made multiple comments to a post about an article on the STALKER game developers having removed the Soviet symbols and the Russian audio in the remastered edition of the game. I would argue that in the thread, there were no comments from me that could be construed by a reasonable person as defensive of Nazism, fascism, or even hinting at it. For example, in one of the comments, I linked a Ukrainian law that prohibits the use of Nazi symbols, though I highly advise looking through all my ten comments as to avoid any misunderstanding or false impressions.

Conversely, one comment posted by another user dismissed Holodomor as Nazi propaganda, which I reported, but a moderator of that community just ended up calling me out for that and taking no action, followed by them banning me.

The thread containing all of my untouched posts is still available via lemmy.zip. My comments are also available for viewing via my user page. They are not available on hexbear due to the ban.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] megopie@lemmy.blahaj.zone 32 points 12 hours ago* (last edited 12 hours ago) (2 children)

Yah, that’s why people call them tankies. Any criticism of the USSR, or even acknowledging why people criticize it, is a banable offense.

The term tankie get’s thrown around a lot, to the point of dilution, but the origin of it comes from western communist who defended the Soviet Union putting down the 1956 Hungarian revolution, notably using T-54/55 tanks. It later came to mean western communist that would ignore or downplay any criticism of the USSR, as “propaganda”. These days it could even be applied more broadly to “People who call them selves left wing or communists but who will defend the actions of any authoritarian regime so long as it is notionally in opposition to the US and it’s allies” IE people who defended Assad and Putin.

I think hexbear fits even a fairly narrow older definition. Which is why most major instances are defederated from them.

[–] rocket_dragon@lemmy.dbzer0.com 20 points 12 hours ago (1 children)

long as it is notionally in opposition to the US and it’s allies

Man, I know I'm preaching to the choir here, but Russia isn't even opposed to the US, as long as the Christian white supremacist fascists are ruling things.

The sheer irony of people playing defense for a white supremacist fascist state and then accusing someone else of being a "fascist sympathizer". Like dawg the call is coming from inside the house.

[–] megopie@lemmy.blahaj.zone 6 points 11 hours ago

I think the current Russian leadership has this detached fantasy of what America's far right are like, this idea that they're homebody rural folks who just want to keep to them selves and that if they're in charge the US will disengage it's self from the rest of the world, leaving Russia to treat Eastern Europe as a playground for their imperialism.

But the thing is, it ignores the agency of the eastern Europe to oppose them, and it ignores the fact that the the US far right is fundamentally narcissistic and egomaniacal. Ultimately the far right of the US will stay engaged in eastern Europe because they will perceive Russia telling them to get out as an insult and a humiliation. The only way the far right would disengage would be if they could frame it as them "winning" and that framing would be perceived as an insult and humiliation to the Russian leadership, so they won't allow it.

So they will come to genuinely hate each other. I don't think this will lead to the US far right suddenly deciding they care deeply about the well being of eastern Europe, but they also aren't going to disengage completely.

[–] Rose@lemmy.zip 4 points 12 hours ago (2 children)

“People who call them selves left wing or communists but who will defend the actions of any authoritarian regime so long as it is notionally in opposition to the US and it’s allies”

I could never understand that. I mean I understand that for someone completely dissatisfied with the government in a Western country, it's a lot easier to just switch sides and join a community of like-minded people with a large state-funded network of information behind it, but the morality of that is just beneath me. Besides, you won't be completely alone even if you oppose or harshly criticize both the West and the likes of Russia or China.

[–] bluGill@fedia.io 5 points 12 hours ago

A lot of people seem to believe "if you are for one thing I'm for then you must be perfect - anytime it is proved otherwise it was a small one time thing so I'll ignore it." It is really hard to admit someone you don't like does do good things, or someone you like does bad things.

[–] megopie@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 points 12 hours ago

I mean, I think a big part of it is foreign influence efforts landing very strongly with dissenting groups in the US. Then forging influence networks using the extant distrust for the US’s government to dismiss nuance that would paint their patrons in a bad light.