On lemmy.world I posted a comment on how liberals use 'tankie' as an invective to shut down dialogue and received tons of hateful replies. I tried to respond in a rational way to each. Someone's said 'get educated' I responded 'Im reading Norman Finkelstein's I'll burn that bridge when I get there' and tried to keep it civil.
They deleted every comment I made and banned me. Proving my point, they just want to shut down dialogue. Freedom of speech doesn't existing in those 'totalitarian' countries right? But in our 'enlightened' western countries we just delete you.
Everyone who has in interest in science knows that you can't prove opinions, but only facts. You can prove stuff like "capitalism is destroying the ecosystem" or "China masacered the Uigurs" you can't prove stuff like "Stalin was right" or "the bests way to interpret Marx is to consider the context he wrote in"
That's the basic difference between empirical and normative science.
And basically all questions of politics are at least partially normative.
I agree that materialistic dialectics can be used as scientific tools, and are by most people, but science also means, you accept that no one can have the "only true opinion" as empirical facts can be interpreted widely different and no human has ALL information. And even if one had, there are always subjective weightings at play (is human suffering worse than human death? Is animal death worse than human suffering? Is the system more valuable than individual freedoms?)
Science means knowing what you can and can't prove, so if you are scientific, you know that not everybody comes to the same conclusion even when using the same facts.
gonna need proof of "China masacered[sic] the Uigurs[sic]" that doesn't cite the far-right extremist Falun Gong cult, its "news" site The Epoch Times, or its Western mouthpiece, fundamentalist evangelical Christian pastor Adrian Zenz.
So what's your problem then? The tanks were sent and the nazis were crushed. Also, krushchev sent the tanks, not stalin. What's your problem with stalin?
What's my problem with Stalin?
I could not have described my problem with talking to people here better than you demonstrated it in this simple question, even if I would have used 100 words.
You being dumbfounded that you have to justify your baseless beliefs that Stalin is some monster is a perfect summary of why you're a lib who will gladly side with fascists when your treats are at stake.
Yeah it seems the problem is that you are a liberal. You calling us woke is a sign of being a wrecker.
Ahaha it gets better every comment. -(Wrong) Assumtions about my political believes -ranting about stuff I day don't even say (classical strawman)
This is a joke that just keeps on giving :D
It's in the title. It's the new woke.
Try reading what thread you're in first.
Also: Would you send tanks into hungary?
Yeah, but I didn't say anywhere that I agree with the OPs on the other server.
I think the word tankie gets used inflationary by centrists that don't know what it means, but that's not what u want to think. You want to put me in a box in your heads ;)
Hey Mr. Actually Laughing, that's what you came in here to do. Don't want to fit in the box? Don't be a square
Oh I don't do, and really don't need to prove that to some online bible stalinists. But its funny what your dogma glasses let you think is a square ^^
"Noooo I am totally not a liberal! I am an anarcho-bidenist-gonzaloite with juan guaido characteristics"
-liberals wanting to not be called liberals
That's what a liberal would say.
A liberal would also dodge all questions that make imperialists uncomfortable, like whether they would send tanks into hungary.
And it just goes on. But I do dodge the questions, I'll give you that. I'll even tell you why: I came here to have interesting discussions on how to create a better society. Communists are in the defense and neoliberalism is omnipresent, connecting and organising are more important then ever, part of connecting is sharing experiences with others online. But after I was in this community for 10 min. I realized, that I won't get that here. Majority of people here is just trying to vilanise everyone who remotely challenges their believes, put them in a box and then being proud they stand up against someone bad. So recently I'm just doing it for the fun and giggles (and therefore not putting effort in answering difficult questions which are actually complicated). The way people really think they are making a point when in reality they just show their own superiority complex isquite entertaining after all.
But the question about sending tanks is important because with this we could weed out nazi enablers.
Sure, because there is only black and white. Either you choose violence in every scenario or u are Nazi lover.
Flawless logic.
So this means you would not send the tanks?
The nazis will now put all non-nazis in hungary into concentration camps.
Nazi enabler.
Edit: You could have avoided most of the violence (that the nazis will inflict on innocent people now) by sending the tanks.
There's that empty liberal appeal to an assumed normative opinion again, combined with "uhh actually you have now proven my nebulous non-point by asking a basic question"
My man is floundering
Jean le Flambeur? More like Jean le Flounder.