I have only been active on hexbear since last year, and checking in from time to time before that, so some of the taglines don't make any sense to me. Can someone please explain?
this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2025
63 points (100.0% liked)
askchapo
23033 readers
309 users here now
Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.
Rules:
-
Posts must ask a question.
-
If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.
-
Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.
-
Try !feedback@hexbear.net if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Thank you! But like, why were these topics struggle sessions?
Cats kill birds, lizards and small mammals at a truly ridiculous rate and have caused the extinction of several such species. Rock stacking is a problem because sometimes stacked rocks are used as a marker either by natives or the national parks service and you making a bunch of fakes could end up causing confusion. Like setting up fake signs at a hiking trail. It also risks damaging the habitats of small animals.
Both of these arguments were contrasted with arguments about personal autonomy and how little damage is done by each individual who does this, compared to other forms of damage that can be done, and an argument followed.
another aspect of the rock stacking is that the stones used to stack are often smooth riverbed stones, which when removed cause the flowing water to erode the riverbed at an increased rate, which has multiple knock-on effects that damage the environment in various and unpredictable ways (increased silt downstream, changes to oxygen levels, etc). it's incredibly harmful to the river's ecosystem.
To be fair, the argument was first about rock stacking on a large scale. Like every tourist, hiker, and camper doing it to post on social media. At the time of the argument, there were a bunch of reddit and tik tok posts about it. We were doing Discourse™ and creating Takes®.
The rock stacking thing was more about people doing it in rivers and causing a bunch of erosion.
It was also that, yes. I remember the destruction of habitat thing and the native appropriation things being mentioned more vividly though. Either way it was am issue of environmental concerns v personal autonomy with a side of this being a minor issue.
When you're hiking on a public trail your personal autonomy is not a major priority.
Yea it was really "Here's why this is bad from a cultural, environmental, and societal perspective with examples of how they have caused negative impacts in specific instances"
Versus
"Yea but don't tell me what to do"
I'm not going to argue which is more important, there is no need to reawaken the struggle session while explaining it.
Honestly this site is no fun without the occasional struggle session. Things have been feeling a little too simpatico around here lately, we banned all the controversial users and now there's no fun drama anymore
That's probably because of federation. Interacting with people on the outside makes us appreciate each other more and gives an outlet for people looking for a fight.
Also you're 100% correct about the rock stacking thing, it was a completely innocent, informative post politely asking people not to go out of their way to do a random environmentally harmful thing, and a bunch of people went crazy over it for no reason.
That struggle session was so stupid because it was obviously started by nerds who never go outside let alone do any hiking, meaning they wouldn't even be in a position to be stacking rocks. People who actually hike would be hit with leave no trace signs while on the trail. The question was settled decades ago.
My personal block list begs to differ
Oh you should totally start a NEW struggle session in another thread. I'm totally up for that.
I agree, as good leftists we do need to be critical of ourselves and other leftists to further our progress, we call them 'struggle sessions', I know that's riffing on the Chinese Cultural Revolution but to me that gives them a negative connotation. What can we learn by only discussing the things we agree with? It's good practice for learning how to give and receive criticism without taking it too personally or getting overly emotional as well. Obviously this doesn't apply to reactionary views or fascist apologia.
I DISAGREE WITH YOU AND THINK YOU SUCK!!!
Dang it, I asked for this
No you didn't and saying you did is revisionism.
Dear god I can't handle the struggle
Yes you can. Not believing yourself is a form of liberalism
Believing in yourself is bourgeois decadence
Thank you for the explanation! Sounds like I missed a major discussion.
If nothing else, I now at least understand the tagline.
I mean, I think this description is pretty strawmanny and not a fair representation of the struggle session, but I'll say no more because this thread is already
enough.
Just wanna chime in and say I'm already sorry I asked about the tagline. This wasn't meant to be bait posting, I just honestly didn't know what it was about.
You did nothing wrong and no one is mad at you.
It's really funny actually
Absolutely not a problem and no need to apologise, though I appreciate it.
Even as someone who posted and got over-invested in both struggle sessions, I think it's 100% funny you asked.
I'm happy to hear that and thank you
I could obviously have framed things differently, but no part of what I said was wrong or misrepresenting either side.
Well, maybe one of us is misremembering/misinterpreted, but I posted in both struggle sessions and I completely disagree with your representation of the sides.
Ecological disruptions
Oh okay
Glad I missed these two