My bad, I missed the .uk instead of .org

deleted by creator

I know you are joking but somehow I don’t think a Nazi style eugenics program is the solution.

It’s an unbelievably stupid decision imo. Talk about tone deaf.

Another banger read

Hear hear!

No I don’t think so either, this type of random ban is kind of their MO though. Maybe we need a YBP category for You’ve Been Pranked? :p

Awesome, well now we have one :)

Thanks, interesting article. What is the source? I couldn’t find it.

The whole purpose (or at least the stated purpose, but that would mean that the creator lied) was to create a community “free of censorship”

I don’t think that was the intent at all. What the mod of the new Europe community objects to is the censorship by feddit mods of anything critical of Israel or critical of Zionism.

Fact is we aren’t a “free speech” instance and have never claimed to be. The community rules are in fact very clear that Zionism isn’t allowed (see below). Anyone who want to go whine about how the leftists at dbzer0 are all terrorist Hamas supporters because we want to stop Israel from starving children to death can go join the circle jerk over at feddit I guess.

2. No Zionism

Any forms of Zionism or Zionist rhetoric will not be tolerated here, this includes Zionist apologia, accusations of antisemitism towards anti-Zionists, or blatant denial or downplaying of the genocide towards Palestinians. Any attempt to uphold or prop up the IHRA definition of antisemitism, will be treated as Zionism. Anyone engaging in Pro-Zionist sentiment or apologia will be actioned in accordance with its severity.

Now the dust has settled and I’ve seen both sides presented, i’m gonna say YDI on this one. The whole purpose of that community was in response to the Zionist position of feddit mods, so of course they are gonna ban Zionists.

Seems those folks aren’t above trolling with throwaway accounts either. I had to remove a lot of nasty transphobic comments from this post, which might give a clue as to the character of some of the folks who are being banned. Not suggesting they came from OP btw.

You called it.

You can’t expect ppl to be sober and moderate content lol.

I don’t think that’s true tbh. The Dems have never managed to nominate a popular woman as their presidential candidate before. Clinton was almost universally disliked by the public (for lots of good reasons other than her gender), and ex-prosecutor Harris’s campaign was hamstrung by Biden, as well as being seen as an other pro-corporate Democrat stooge. AOC might actually have a fighting chance compared to her predecessors. But she’ll never be able to be the Democratic candidate until the old guard of leadership is replaced, let’s face facts.

You can edit the post to remove the NSFW tag. I can’t do it for you unfortunately.

So-called “colour revolutions” are an invention of infamous conspiracy theorist, and perennial presidential candidate, Lyndon LaRouche. There’s a good (quite long) video on this topic here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OFyn_KSy80 which is the fourth in a series about the Ukraine war.

Also a great primer essay on the topic of campism, which will help you understand the mindset: https://newpol.org/issue_post/internationalism-anti-imperialism-and-the-origins-of-campism/

Are you doin’ ok buddy?

It seems to me we are really only arguing about the degree to which the Republicans are worse than the Democrats. You are arguing the case that the Dems are significantly more benevolent, but that’s a very subjective assessment and depends what type of issues you decide to focus on. If you are more focused on international affairs and the number of brown people being killed by US manufactured weapons then there is no significant difference between the parties. If you are focused on domestic issues like health care then, sure, Obamacare is significantly better than nothing, even if it is a pale imitation of what a properly functioning health care system looks like.

When you look at the big(ger) picture, the US is governed under a plutocratic system of government whichever side is in power. The only way to have a properly functioning liberal democracy is to prevent owners of private capital from having any say in how the country is governed (so no more corporate donations, industry lobbyists, legislation written by large corporations, etc). But neither mainstream party has any intention of tackling those issues, or tackling wealth inequality. There’s sadly very little policy difference between the two parties on those issues in my opinion, and I don’t think it’s misleading to point it out.

Correct but German’s don’t understand the concept of civil disobedience (not that i expect them to violate their laws but you get the idea now how we got WW2 atrocities)

I don’t think it’s just a German thing.

• Liberal perspective: our legal system may be imperfect but its important to always follow the law, because otherwise it will lead to anarchy. A good citizen always upholds the law.
• Leftist perspective: this law is fucked up and we will do everything we can to resist and refuse compliance, even if that requires being brave. A good person never complies with unjust laws.

Neoliberalism is the dominant form of liberalism not only in the US but in most of the west, so it’s safe to assume that’s the definition we’re working with here. But here, I’ll give you another example:

Look at how Demsthe German government has treated paying customer Israel vs non-paying folks in Gaza.