• LeniX@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    The New Atlas states that some reactionary military government is good actually

    Then no one is going to post that. We’re only posting that we deem useful. In any case, most people on this instance are capable of dissecting reactionary bullshit. And, you should not take anyone’s word uncritically, even if it’s coming from Marxists - no one knows everything, everyone can make mistakes.

    if you’re just going to completely ignore everything I’m saying

    Interesting. Multiple people explained it succinctly, but it is us ignoring you and not the other way around. At the very least address the counterpoints presented to you.

    • ButtBidet [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago
      >The New Atlas states that some reactionary military government is good actually
      

      Then no one is going to post that.

      I swear to go, it happens all the time.

      if you’re just going to completely ignore everything I’m saying

      “and go right to insults”. Finish the sentence. “Lib purity” is not being against a guy who’s hard right? Like I can get there’s a case for disagreement, but come on.

      • LeniX@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        “Lib purity” is not being against a guy who’s hard right?

        No. “Lib purity” is dismissing all information from a source you disagree with, even if some information coming from them is factual and truthful, specifically because they’re a chud. I stress again - we are against the guy, overall. But just because HE said something does not make that something untruthful. We CAN engage with the information critically. We don’t live in a world where every source is a ML and we can just consume information without fear of it being compromised. It is no reason to not post good bits. And by the way, I watched the video - there is nothing reactionary in it. If there was - I’m sure there would have been a disclaimer.

        Imagine canning Lenin because he supposedly had some socially conservative takes.

        We did not ignore completely what you were saying, we addressed your issue with not posting Berletic’s takes on Ukraine and explained why this sort of thing is dogmatic.