You can’t even speak frankly here. I came to Lemmy because I was tired of being censored by Reddit, but it seems like this place is just as restrictive on speech as Reddit was.

People, if we are going to talk about systemic change for a better world, violence has to be a tool in the toolbox.

  • ElectroVagrant@lemmy.worldM
    6·
    8 months ago

    Locking this for similar reasons as I did another recent post, except this one is explicitly encouraging violent action. Further, MasterBlaster420, you seem unable to have this discussion without resorting to insulting people left and right.

    See the following:

    With this in mind, it would probably be wiser to permanently ban you from this community, but instead I’m giving a temporary ban. I’d encourage you to reflect on how you approach discussing this subject. Rather than suggesting general violence for enacting change, read further on the histories relating to the subject and really engage with them.

    Recognize why there’s an aversion to violence, who takes advantage of it to subvert its aims, and whether it may be better to help and organize those that align with you, than repel them into the arms of those you oppose.

  • The Snark Urge@lemmy.worldEnglish
    262·
    8 months ago

    Talk about violence on a social media platform is a legal liability. Who should take that risk on? Corporations? Random private citizens who happen to run an instance of lemmy?

    If you want to talk about violence so badly, you will have to either find a platform that will take that risk on, or take the risk onto yourself.

    • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.techEnglish
      19·
      8 months ago

      People advocating these things are never willing to put their money where their mouth is and create their own instance. Anyone can create their own instance, it just never seems to be them.

      Meanwhile this person seems to be perfectly content with feds bashing down my door because of stuff they say, just not their door.

      • Masterblaster420@lemmy.worldOP
        217·
        8 months ago

        This feels like a dare to me. I don’t create my own instances because i don’t want to spend all my time tinkering with some BS on the internet, but it looks like I need to put my money where my mouth is. I’ll be right back.

        • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.techEnglish
          11·
          8 months ago

          Not daring. Just saying Lemmy can absolutely accommodate you, but we’re individuals, we are held personally liable for what is posted. If you want to post that sort of content you can, the beauty of the fediverse is that you or your group can easily spin up your own instance and say whatever you like. But then you are also personally responsible for that.

          I used to be very open to privacy on mine until someone sent waves of spambots at it and then I had to lock it down. I wanted to allow people from tor and vpns but then I quickly realized I would be the one in trouble if anything was said. I just can’t have that amount of risk, I just wanted to host a small community.

            • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.techEnglish
              5·
              8 months ago

              I actually read that exact one when I had just set it up. I came over during the big Reddit exodus and was so excited to set up my instance, just a small one with a few communities that I felt like I could handle. The downside is it’s the whole of the fediverse, and I quickly had to defed from several instances and had to moderate way more than I’d like. It’s honestly exhausting, and then the whole CSAM attacks happened, and then the spam attacks, and it’s a lot for one guy.

              I broke down during the first csam attacks, I saw some horrific shit. I luckily was in therapy and talked about it, but goddamn do they post the worst things out there. I never thought I’d have contacts with federal agencies as a reporter (in the US if you host a site you are a mandated reporter), but here we are. All because I just wanted to talk about pop music.

              And then people wonder why I don’t allow other material. I can barely handle the okayish material posted, let alone actual vile shit that comes my way, no one prepped me for that. I give kudos to others who do, the lemmy.world admins are way stronger than I am, but damn are there a lot of people out there who just want to ruin the little communities we have.

              So, back to the OP, that’s why I kneejerk reacted there. It’s not nearly as fun hosting this as I thought it would be, and I’ve debated many times shutting it down, but I believe in the fediverse and open social media so I try to keep it up. It’s constant spam fighting, trolling protection, and just a headache, and it’s still never enough, users always demand it should be more open, but I just can’t.

  • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
    141·
    8 months ago

    If you consistently run into the problem that nobody wants to hear what you’re saying, maybe it’s time to stop saying it.

    I’m not saying EVERY case, but, maybe consider it.

    • Masterblaster420@lemmy.worldOP
      420·
      8 months ago

      why would i change my fundamental understanding of rational morality based on popular opinion? i believe that there are more limp-wristed pacifists out there than there are warriors with a conscience, but that just means i need to amplify myself even more so people understand what’s at stake.

        • Masterblaster420@lemmy.worldOP
          415·
          8 months ago

          hey man, i appreciate your sincere reply and i’ll definitely check out the links. I’m just a little wary of calling myself a socialist - not because i’m not a socialist (i definitely am), but just because it pigeon-holes my goals a little bit, while also alienating a lot of people who may not think of it that way. i just see a myriad of problems in which the only solution is to get rid of the conservatives blocking progress.

          also, there really are a bunch of limp-wristed pacifists out there and i don’t see why they shouldn’t be labeled as such. light a fire under their pansy asses.

      • whaleross@lemmy.world
        8·
        8 months ago

        You are free to vent your opinion but other people are free to not agree. Or listen. Or care. What you going to do? Enact violence on everybody?

      • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
        72·
        8 months ago

        Or, you can just keep thinking that you’re the ONLY one who has ever figured out the solution. 🤷🏻‍♂️

        • Masterblaster420@lemmy.worldOP
          212·
          8 months ago

          see? that’s what i’m talking about! i know i’m not alone in thinking “man, all this shit would be a lot easier if there were a lot less conservatives in the world”. but where the fuck do we go to talk about that?

          • Rhynoplaz@lemmy.world
            93·
            8 months ago

            You don’t. You don’t talk about stupid shit like that.

            Read what you put in quotes, but replace Conservatives with, well, pretty much anything, and you’ll summarize the philosophy of every genocidal dictator in history.

            Here’s an easy example to get you started:

            Jews and Hitler.

            • Masterblaster420@lemmy.worldOP
              210·
              8 months ago

              and you’re foolish enough to be duped by goose and gander arguments, which is why lawful good people will always lose to lawful evil. sorry you don’t get it. wish i could tell you to get back with me in 10 years, but it’ll be too late by then. you’re going to see what happens when you fight fairly with sociopaths.

  • BombOmOm@lemmy.worldEnglish
    143·
    8 months ago

    if we are going to talk about systemic change for a better world, violence has to be a tool in the toolbox

    If we are going to talk about change, we should absolutely talk about it, discuss it, vote on candidates instituting it. Violence is the instant death of talk, discussion, and the democratic process.

  • Quereller@lemmy.one
    61·
    8 months ago

    Some people want the society transformed into a theocracy, or an ethno state, or a national socialist state. Some people think no one should own a personal car or a big house.

    Do you accept violence from these people against you and your loved ones?

        • Masterblaster420@lemmy.worldOP
          13·
          8 months ago

          of course they do. that’s my entire point. debate is useless. if you don’t start fighting for the society you want to live in, somebody else is, and you’re gonna be living in their ‘perfect world’. you need to decide which side you’re on.

    • Masterblaster420@lemmy.worldOP
      117·
      8 months ago

      cute quote. didn’t read the book. it sounds like what someone without a spine or real moral compass would say. it’s really not that hard to understand right and wrong. people want to make you think that it’s all too complicated, but it’s really not.

      EDIT: you pussies sure can use the downvote button, but yet you can’t make a worthy counter argument.

    • Masterblaster420@lemmy.worldOP
      23·
      8 months ago

      I’m not advocating anything but effective solutions. I don’t want to see people suffer, not even my enemies (unless their suffering serves to deter others from standing in the way of humanity).

        • Masterblaster420@lemmy.worldOP
          23·
          8 months ago

          i’m opposed to suffering. a quick and mostly painless death is still in the realm of possible solutions. I would only advocate for something more cruel if it would pave the way for less suffering. this is all basically a trolley problem we have to solve.

            • Masterblaster420@lemmy.worldOP
              41·
              8 months ago

              this is so hard to explain to someone who’s just concretizing their world view. there’s a lot of philosophy and practical application involved with my line of thought, so please bear with me.

              first of all, i’m pragmatic. this is not about retribution or revenge. this is about plain and simple problem solving. what’s the problem? too many things are suffering and we have the power to reduce that suffering. why can’t we do it? because there are too many people who disregard the suffering of others. it’s about altruistic vs narcissistic beliefs. i don’t believe that everyone in the world is altruistic by nature. there are certainly sociopaths who will never learn to consider anyone but themselves. modern society has enabled those people to rise to the top and influence many others.

              what’s the solution? to build an altruistic society based on rational thought and logic. some people say that those concepts are incompatible, and that logic favors an individualistic society. i think that most of the people that believe this more or less see the world through an economist’s lens. but if you really look at the whole of society and its history, there have always been people advocating for an altruistic society. this is why we have the humanities as a branch of academia.

              but none of that really matters because, in the end, society has been molded by the victors, and made in the image of whatever the conquerors held as their values. i propose that we, the altruists, use that same model of might-makes-right to form the society that we want to see. really, there is no objective morality, so ultimately, we’re all just beating each other over the head to get what we want. why don’t we beat each other over the head to make a lasting world that favors compassion?

              you might say that those concepts are incompatible, but i ask you to take a look at the long-term, big-picture view. yes, the steps to achieve what we want look messy, but we’re talking about securing a future for untold generations to come. if you think about the lifespans of countless future generations, it more than justifies the bloody steps we would have to take now to achieve it.

              in the past, i might have said “we’ll get there. the history of society has always been 2 steps forward, one step back”, but we’re now running out of time. we could see serious extinction events in this century if we don’t act YESTERDAY to get a hold of the situation. there are so many innocent creatures that don’t deserve what we’re unleashing on the world right now. furthermore, i see us only having a small window of time before the sociopaths that run the world develop the tools to keep us under their thumb for a very long time, if not forever.

              so with that in mind, an ‘ends justify the means’ approach is more than justified.

              i don’t think that really answered your question. you want a list of grievances? just take a look at most of the threads here on Lemmy - everything that everyone is sick and tired of. that is my list of grievances.

                • Masterblaster420@lemmy.worldOP
                  42·
                  8 months ago

                  what a cop-out response to well thought out statement. you come off as vapid and shallow. i’m old enough to be over getting laid. i’m married, son and we’re both as happy as we can be. would you like to address my points now, junior?