Update:
The comments from this post will not be removed as to preserve the discussion around the announcement. Any continued discussions outside of this thread that violate server rules will be removed. We feel that everyone that has an opinion, and wanted to vent, has been heard.

————-

Original post:
Yesterday, we received information about the planned federation by Hexbear. The announcement thread can be found here: https://www.hexbear.net/post/280770. After reviewing the thread and the comments, it became evident that allowing Hexbear to federate would violate our rules.

Our code of conduct and server rules can be found here.

The announcement included several concerning statements, as highlighted below:

  • “Please try to keep the dirtbag lib-dunking to hexbear itself. Do not follow the Chapo Rules of Posting, instead try to engage utilizing informed rhetoric with sources to dismantle western propaganda. Posting the western atrocity propaganda and pig poop balls is hilarious but will pretty quickly get you banned and if enough of us do it defederated.”
  • “The West’s role in the world, through organizations such as NATO, the IMF, and the World Bank - among many others - are deeply harmful to the billions of people living both inside and outside of their imperial core.”
  • “These organizations constitute the modern imperial order, with the United States at its heart - we are not fooled by the term “rules-based international order.” It is in the Left’s interest for these organizations to be demolished. When and how this will occur, and what precisely comes after, is the cause of great debate and discussion on this site, but it is necessary for a better world.”

The rhetoric and goal of Hexbar are clear based on their announcement: to “dismantle western propaganda” and "demolish organizations such as NATO” shows that Hexbar has no intention of "respecting the rules of the community instance in which they are posting/commenting.” It’s to push their beliefs and ideology.

In addition, several comments from a Hexbear admin, demonstrate that instance rules will not be respected.

Here are some examples:

“I can assure you there will be no lemmygrad brigades, that energy would be better funneled into the current war against liberalism on the wider fediverse.”

“All loyal, honest, active and upright Communists must unite to oppose the liberal tendencies shown by certain people among us, and set them on the right path. This is one of the tasks on our ideological front.”

Overall community comments:

To clarify, for those who have inquired about why Hexbear versus Lemmygrad, it should be noted that we are currently exploring the possibility of defederating from Lemmygrad as well based on similar comments Hexbear has made.

Defederation should only be considered as a last resort. However, based on their comments and behavior, no positive outcomes can be expected.

We made the decision to preemptively defederate from Hexbear for these reasons. While we understand that not everyone may agree with our decision, we believe it is important to prioritize the best interests of our community.

  • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    and apply idealisms to reality

    Marxism is a materialist philosophy, it is specifically anti-idealism. I suspect this is a case of a person that does not understand what idealism actually means in this context though so I’ll help out with a very simplified explanation:

    Idealism = the belief that human beings control their environment through the use of ideas. That humans have ideas, and then use those ideas to impact their environment.

    Materialism = the belief that human beings get their ideas from the material conditions that they find themselves in. That it is actually the environment that human beings exist in that gives them their ideas.

    Marxism is a fundamentally a materialist philosophy. Its key thinkers were viciously anti-idealism and sought to ground marxist analysis in scientific analysis, hence the nickname “the immortal science”. Liberalism on the other hand holds idealism as its core tenet and believes that if you just get enough people to change their ideas you can create change. Hence why many liberals think you can just convince the rich to go completely against their material interests with discussion rather than understanding that they hold their ideas because they are the rich, because of the material conditions they have that differ from the working class.

    • duviobaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      24
      ·
      1 year ago

      Pseudo-leftist like you tankies do not belong here or anywhere else. Go back to your wannabe-commie instance. While you are defending imperialism over there, we will be here having our fun - in reality

    • Cabrio@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      22
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Idealisms in this case is referring to the attempted application of one’s ideals, not the philosophy of idealism. Materialism is a Marxist ideal for example.

      I suspect this is a case of a person that does not understand what idealism actually means

      If self awareness was a disease you’d be the healthiest person alive. Funny how you tried to throw your pseudo intellectual weight around but missed the first important step of ensuring you had adequate cognizance of the message you were responding to.

      Asking a simple question about my use of idealism, or for that matter having more than passing grasp of English, would have clued you onto your misinterpretation.

      If you had you’d have saved yourself a lot of keystrokes.

      • foggy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        17
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        And this conversation right here is why it’s a good thing we defederate.

        Conversations like this are weaponized by groups like them. It’s not a good faith attempt at reaching common ground. It’s pigeonholing arguments for dunks and upvotes in an effort to destabilize the more unified conversations that are organically arising.