diegeticscream[all]🔻 @ simply_surprise @lemmygrad.ml

[any/all]

---

Read more

Posts

12

Comments

233

Joined

4 yr. ago

That's cool, I just wanted to be clear on how I'm trying to interact - it's easy to miscommunicate on the internet!

My issues with "Xi as Winnie the Pooh" center around the way it's presented in the Western internet. Xi is often depicted with harshly yellow skin, and with comically slanted eyes.

There's clearly a commonality between how racist caricatures of Chinese people have been created historically, like this:

https://thomasnastcartoons.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/the-coming-man-20-may-18811.jpg

https://www.reddit.com/r/China/comments/ckjoq7/xinnie_the_pooh_street_art_mural/ (sure, it's not a real mural, but it was upvoted 400+ times)

To be clear, I'm trying to communicate that it's considered racist/bigoted by Lemmy.ml's mods, and that's the reason the user was banned.

While I see it as bigoted, I understand that it's commonly used in lemmy.world (where we are) and I'm not going to police it's use, dunk on the user using it, or report it the way I would in .ML, Lemmygrad, or Hexbear.

The fediverse is an ideologically shared space, and I'm doing my best to reasonably interact on other instances!

With those qualifiers, would you still like me to share my reasoning?

Is this post just crying because you got banned? Why not just wait the 13 days to ride it out?

Lemmy.ml isn't even your instance, and posting in .world isn't going to reverse your ban.

.ML was always explicitly leftist, and run by communists. They're just nice and try for a reasonably ideologically diverse community.

You clearly aren't interested in following their rules (your use of the racist comparison of Xi and Winnie the Pooh breaks their "no bigotry" rule, and you can't seem to post sourced posts that fit their communities.)

Why aren't you interacting on instances you want to be on, and that want the kind of interactions you offer?

The US military, the strongest army in the world, was defeated by a bunch of rice farmers? Come on, get some better writers.

The Vietnamese were a sophisticated guerilla force that had already successfully fought the French and Japanese. They had been fighting in that environment for literal decades.

Yeah, they're awful

They made multiple Romania anti-communist posts, so you're probably right

I think the framing is important, the OP was saying they hate "low IQ rednecks" as if the smart city crackers are better.

Like, hate 'em for the right reasons, not the same reasons the classist, ableist, ivory tower shitlibs do.

Most of the chuds are petit-bourge. Any actual "working class" in the U$ is mostly colonized people, I think this is an uncharitable take on them.

The U$ won't have a revolution until the empire collapses, but this is still rad.

Fascists "hide their power level", Communists "disdain to conceal their views and aims".

idk about "low IQ" as an insult. Whatever the stink that's been made about it, I think it's super rad that a statement like that can be made by somebody in a position like that. Marxism is definitely on the rise again!

If the U$ does nothing, they're guaranteed to lose their hegemonic position as China gets better.

If they goad China into a shooting war, they're just about guaranteed to lose.

If they goad China into a shooting war where it looks like China's the bad guy, they'll probably lose.

If they can convince Taiwan to buy over priced military trash, they'll put off the decline of the U$ for a little longer.

The White Terror ended in 1987, and involved the genocide of the native peoples of Formosa.

It doesn't seem honest to refer to "public opinion" while ignoring the events that shaped that opinion.

Taiwan: the people of Taiwan don't want China there and China shouldn't invade.

Not to link dump below, but I think the history of the civil war and specifically the White Terror give necessary context. China (as the ROC) already invaded Taiwan.

"The KMT lost the Chinese Civil War and retreated to Taiwan in 1949. However, Chiang Kai-shek intended to eventually return to mainland China and retake control of it. In order to do this, the KMT attempted to "sinicize" the Taiwanese people.[19][20][21][22] KMT's Taiwan Garrison Commander Chen Yi stated that after 50 years of Japanese rule, "Taiwanese customs, thought, and language would have to gradually return to that of the Chinese people".[23] The KMT believed that a centrally controlled curriculum would forge a unified national sentiment in Taiwan. They also believed education would help build a martial spirit and stimulate enough military, economic, political, and cultural strength not only to survive, but also to recover the mainland.[24]".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taiwanese_people

40 years of martial law and something like 20,000 executions were enacted in order to build the public opinion they have now.

Please note that I agree with your main point (China should not militarily invade Taiwan), but I do support China's stated goal of peaceful reunification

I'm sorry but I don't want to pay for someone else's child care. You had the kid, now you pay for it.

Who's going to change your diaper in the nursing home?

Most of the negative stuff is either jokes that haven't aged well...

"I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion. The famine was their own fault for breeding like rabbits."

or unapologetic support for imperialism, both of which were much more common at the time.

You think the people suffering from imperialism supported it?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racial_views_of_Winston_Churchill

If this breaks the "no idealism" rule in the mods eyes,

Naw, we've had our death penalty struggle session here, and this is a pretty balanced take.

I think Fidel's change of mind about the death penalty is a good reference point too.

Hi, you can take action by blocking the most prolific communities - there aren't that many in either instance that are high volume.

There are also instances that don't federate with either.

You've unfortunately been banned from lemmygrad, so I won't be able to see any of your replies.

"I’ll be happy to revisit that stance when evidence is presented." isn't the statement of blind faith. Your stance on Stalin, ironically, is.

While you're wistfully dealing with our separation, please think of two things:

• Your own argument demands that you admit your stance on Stalin is wrong. You haven't acknowledged that for several comments now.
• You've been unable to respond to my initial question because you'll have to drop your stance. Stalin cannot both be a power-seizing maniac, and someone who begs the Politboro to let him resign. We know the one is true. Can you accept your ideas are false?

So, you cannot admit even the possibility it could be false.

I don't see any evidence or reason to think it is false. I'll be happy to revisit that stance when evidence is presented.

This isn't a response to what I said.

You very conveniently ignored the bit in that comment where your own argument forces you to admit that you're wrong about Stalin.

This is faith, no different from religion. I do not think I can get through to you.

I get that you're having trouble with cognitive dissonance, but this isn't a response to "I would need evidence".

You still haven't answered the question.