211
https://nitter.net/micheller3307/status/1721661681896448001
Btw this woman didnt support BLM in the slightest lol.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 07 Nov 2023
211 points (100.0% liked)
the_dunk_tank
15880 readers
402 users here now
It's the dunk tank.
This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.
Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.
Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.
Rule 3: No sectarianism.
Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome
Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)
Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.
Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.
Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml
Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
That is not entirely true. Dr. King, for example, spoke out in support of Israel. Had he not been murdered, I do not believe he would have maintained that support, but the fact remains that in the middle of the century, some movement leaders believed Israel to be a fundamentally progressive project, and were blind to the suffering of Palestinians.
I don’t want to give MLK a pass, but I was thinking about something similar: so many European communists in the 19th century had kinda bad takes on the USA (Marx and Engels included).
Obviously we are all products of our times, but I wonder if how much information we have at our disposal now (thanks to the internet) skews our perceptions of how easy it is to find out information, even things we are receptive to.
It was basically impossible to learn anything about anything back in the 90s. Like you could go to libraries and then you were limited to whatever they had, and if you knew it existed you could use inter-library loan. But, like, the limits of the world were newspapers, popular magazines, bookstores, and libraries. Good luck learning anythign without committing serious time to it.
Just getting exposed to it could be challenging, today you could have a Hexbear tell you on the Internet to read Lenin or post hog and, you know, go from there.
Good luck for that to happen before the Internet, especially if you lived in a reactionary or just lib territory
Even with so much access to information, almost everyone still gets almost all their information from local sources they trust, in their native language. Actively seeking out foreign news and blogs is a good counter to this. Browser translation is excellent these days.