Has anyone else noticed how prevalent Hexbear posters have suddenly become? Maybe sometime last week I noticed nearly every political post had at least one long thread of Hexbear users that do nothing but repeat CCP talking points while waving anyway anything even remotely reliable as Western propaganda. That or getting all excited about trolled libs. The way they tell it, you’d think everything from DW, to Fox, to Propublica, to straight up AP News articles, are all written by the same people.

Not to mention, their info on the Fediverse observer is either straight up wrong or there’s some serious botting going on. According to that, the instance is less than a month old, yet somehow they already have one of the largest, most active userbases, along with far and away the most comments of any instance.

Seems to me like Lemmygrad on steroids. Considering we defederated from them, seems like a no-brainer to block Hexbear as well.

So glad this thread could become such a perfect microcosm of why we need to defederate.

  • marx_mentat [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    50
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Let’s not pretend that your politics aren’t inherently authoritarian as well.

    Either you support capitalism (or worse), which is grossly authoritarian as it inflicts massive violence not only via warfare but through mass starvation and deprivation, or you support socialism, in which case you have two options:

    1. The violent overthrow of the current system (spoiler alert: that’s a very authoritarian thing to do!)

    2. The gradual reform of the current system, meaning maintaining the status quo for an exceptionally long time as we ever so slowly creep our way to a more just economic system while countless people starve, go homeless, die without healthcare, end up in yet-another war and so on (which is a very authoritarian proposition, just throwing away the lives of the poor in your own country-not to mention those in the developing world-just so you can have a neat and tidy reformist approach that doesn’t rock the boat.)

      • very_poggers_gay [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        56
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Authoritarianism is a political system characterized by the rejection of political plurality, the use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo, and reductions in the rule of law, separation of powers, and democratic voting.

        Hey America (and Canada, UK, Australia, etc.), how ya doing?

        ✅ Rejection of political plurality (See: Range of acceptable thought among mainstream political parties; Also, consider some self-reflection)

        ✅ Strong central power to preserve the political status quo (See: Mainstream media apparatus, spanning news, movies, tv, etc.)

        ✅ Reductions in the rule of law (See: Absolute failure to hold politicians or corporations accountable)

        ✅ Reductions in the separation of powers (See: Politicians funded by and catering to corporate interests)

        ✅ Reductions in democratic Voting (See again: Politicians funded by and catering to corporate interests + absolute failure to hold politicians accountable; Also see: Rampant gerrymandering, erosion of voters’ right, zero democracy in the workplace or outside of political elections)

        • autismdragon [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          50
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          No see you’re allowed to decide if the guy with the blue tie or the guy with the red tie is your representative (uh… if you live in one of the handful of districts that are competitive anyway) so that means it cant be authoritarian. God I love our illusion of democracy. It makes me feel so nice.

      • aaro [they/them, she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        54
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        rejectetion of political plurality

        use of strong central power to preserve the political status quo

        reductions in the rule of law

        authoritarianism is characterized by reductions in the rule of law?? what???

        separation of powers

        and Democratic voting

        • 420blazeit69 [he/him]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          1 year ago

          authoritarianism is characterized by reductions in the rule of law?? what???

          Here, “rule of law” means roughly “all people are equal before the law” (that is, you don’t have a group of people who are above it).

          cop lord-bezos-amused a-little-trolling

          Emojis unrelated

        • awwwyissss@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Hey, what about this tangentially-connected thing from 70 years ago?

            • awwwyissss@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              1 year ago

              The cold war ended, the USSR collapsed, and china shifted to being a semi-capitalist autocracy… I could go on but you’re just trying to dunk on the libs (like MAGA, big surprise) and I’m not one anyway.

              • autismdragon [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                43
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                (like MAGA, big surprise)

                You understand the fact that the content of the dunks, and what we’re dunking ON, being different materially matters right? That just the mere fact that we both dislike liberalism doesn’t make us the same when we dislike it for entirely different reasons?

                Like, even on the few points where we agree, its almost always different reasons and logic behind taking those positions.

                • awwwyissss@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Similar because a good portion of the propaganda in both extremist groups is coming from places like the CCP and Kremlin that want to destabilize the US and other powerful countries (like India).

                  Divide and conquer isn’t anything new, but it’s implementation on social media is.

                  • autismdragon [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    43
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Question for you, why would the destabilization of the US be a bad thing? For me it would be an objectively good thing considering all the evil in this world it has wrought. While I will continue to deny that I’m a paid shill for China and ESPECIALLY Russia, I won’t deny that the end of western neoliberal hegemony is a desirable goal for me.

                  • AntiOutsideAktion [he/him]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    40
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    The idea that American right wingers are taking their ideological cues from a communist government is probably the most galaxybrain take I’ve ever heard

                    And by the way, it’s the Communist Party of China (CPC). You just come off as ignorant and possibly racist when you deliberately use the wrong name for them.

                    And are you actually saying that destabilizing the hegemonic global empire is a BAD thing? Let alone the fucking genocidal religious fascist government that’s running India right now??

                    hitler-detector beep beep beep

                  • macabrett [comrade/them, any]@hexbear.net
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    38
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    It’s very easy to never question your own world view if you think everyone you engage with that disagrees with you is getting talking points from another government. Have you considered that your thinking that our ideas come from government talking points IS an actual talking point from western politicians?

              • booty [he/him]@hexbear.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                32
                ·
                1 year ago

                And we live in a gerontocracy, like the children of the people responsible for the stuff that happened 70 years ago are still in power right now. It’s not like 70 years is a world away, the current US president has firmly established memories of 1954, the guy was 12.

                • AntiOutsideAktion [he/him]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  26
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Very true. In fact I would like to elaborate on your point to say the very same individuals in charge during all the heinous shit during the cold war are still in place, of whom Biden is one.

      • wild_dog [they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        wanna explain how that definition applies to us??? it’s really easy to just point at a wikipedia article but you’re not really proving anything by just stating an extremely loaded definition.