1. Mod of [email protected] posts a great Greta Thunberg quote, but then tries to use it to justify not voting in the upcoming US election
  2. Multiple people point out that’s very clearly not what she meant
  3. Removed by mod Removed by mod Removed by mod Removed by mod

Using your mod powers to decide who is allowed and not allowed to speak is not very anarchist of you, @[email protected]

  • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    From what I see, Greta was sufficiently vague on this either way. In that case, going to an anarchist space to argue for electoralism using this vagueness as a starting point seems to be sufficient reason for removal. The removed comment from the OP was not even correcting people misrepresenting Greta’s words, it was about starting an argument with someone suggesting 3rd parties (a support which I think also doesn’t belong in an anarchist space, but whatever) with the usual 2-party electoralist talking points

      • db0@lemmy.dbzer0.comM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        Not gonna argue with you, mate. I’m just clearing out that you did not go there to correct misinformation as the person I was replying to made an analogy with, but to argue against 3rd parties and for electoralism in general.

        • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.catOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          2 months ago

          You’re welcome to your interpretation. In my opinion I went there to protect the space against someone who mainly wants to use it to talk about Kamala Harris and the Democrats, and is wearing a fairly unconvincing anarchist disguise and couching their message in terms of “not voting at all” without bothering to disguise it all that much.