cross-posted from: https://lemmy.blahaj.zone/post/15032962
Alt text: a screenshot of a microblog post with the text "you walking down an alleyway with a gram of weed in your pocket, who would you rather catch you?" Below are two pictures side by side. One of Kamala Harris and the other of Batman.
A community for anarchist. Anarchism is a set of philosophies that promotes a world free of hierarchical systems.
No electioneering, no telling people to or not to vote or who to vote for. Interpretating this rule as forbidding critisism of candidates is certainty an interpretation but in the context of an ANARCHIST space it's a bad interpretation.
No bootlicking & that will include being hyper pedantic about people calling politicians, prosecutors, bureaucrats, etc, cops.
Yes, if you're an obnoxious neo-lib you're going to get banned. If you're not obnoxious & have good faith questions you can stay.
All Capybara Are Bros IDTSCJSTDNBDLFTSATICLPE
Are you electioneering?
Are you?
Have I told you vote for candidate X?
#bandname
Don’t vote for candidate X is still electioneering?
Have I told you don't vote for candidate X? Or did I criticize a politician? Did I say tactical voting is the big poo poo? Why does criticizing a politician cause so many to reflectively defend them?
Probably because they disagree with you?
To be clear I agree with your criticisms, Kamala is 100% a cop. I disagree with you banning anyone who uses the word “vote” in their disagreement.
Kamala is the democratic candidate for president, anytime we talk about her we’re implicitly talking about the election. You can’t then turn around and ban anyone who then brings up the election. You brought it up first!
If you think “Kamala sucks” posts aren’t electioneering then I don’t know how to help you.
I've not been banning people just for the word vote, I've been banning people for telling others to vote or who to vote for.
Do you really expect an anarchist space to have a rule against criticizing members of the political class?
This community was created because users where concerned an other community was going to drop a similar rule, this community has been growing since it started so there are people that I'm assuming do approved of the rules.
I will throw you a bone, I've rewriten the rule & it will include telling people not to vote. I'm not going to tell anarchist they can't criticize a member of the political class.
As someone who was a politico/political activist(seeing the sausage cracked out made me an anarchist), minding the people who are already committed supporters, phone banking to remind people to vote, taking people to voting polls, & calling people who's mail in ballets have been rejected so they can fix it, is going to be far more effective then browbeating randos online about the lesser evil.
That bit was hyperbole because I thought you were taking the rules too far.
No? And I’m not sure where that came from. Regardless I appreciate the rules update.
I doubt anything happening on lemmy will have a huge impact on the election. Direct action in your local community will always have the greatest impact.
I do believe that posts about a candidate without
talking about how you plan on voting (and why) is a net-negative. There’s great value in saying “this is why I don’t like this candidate, but I am still voting for them”.
I know you love saying “we’re all adults who can make their own decisions” but that ignores the obvious truth that every bit of information you take in will affect your reality. We are nothing but our past experiences.
I really don't care to tell people who to vote for but if you really want to know I don't live in a state that's competitive so I'm most likely going to write in something that mocks our dumpster fire of a democracy.
Nobody here is promoting the orange fascist, that would get a ban.