I got banned for telling the guy posting Tucker Carlson on “Progressive Politics” that he’s a chickenshit coward because he couldn’t give a reason why he’s platforming Nazi shit and instead deflecting to a hundred other topics.
I’m not mad that I got banned, I was very rude to the guy, but it is pretty gross that they’re still promoting a reactionary white supremacist as “progressive politics.” I reported the post to the mod and got banned instead.
Oh well, that place has a history of hosting that kind of garbage anyway. No big loss.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heartbreaking:_The_Worst_Person_You_Know_Just_Made_a_Great_Point
Practically everyone on Lemmy knows Carlson is a POS. Some of us suspect he’s a CIA op or asset, and if he isn’t, he may as well be.
It’s one thing to state what should be obvious, and another to fly off the handle about it.
I’m firm in my position that someone who posts obvious Nazi shit and gets defensive and dodgey when pressed is a chickshit coward. I stand by what I said, and I make no apology.
I saw this as your comments were being deleted… although I agreed with you position… eh… you weren’t being very nice. I get why you got your comments deleted, and maybe a day ban. did you get perm-banned?
Nope, just a couple days.
Again, that part isn’t a big deal, and I did deserve it. Still, I think I’m done with that place if they’re hosting Nazi content.
This isn’t the first time, either.
I’ve been subbed to that comm for a while, and I’ve seen some odd stuff there, too. and it’s not a very tolerant place for discussion, as you have found out, yourself. good links, but sometimes weird content.
like many places I’ve found in the lemmyverse, it’s one of those “vote and move on” comms
Yeah that community hosts weird shit from time to time.
That poster in particular I think gets caught up in promoting some nasty stuff while trying to take a very hardline anti-imperialist stance. I think it’s a sort of “broken clocks” attitude, but that ends up promoting people like Tucker Carlson or posting straight up antisemitic shit (no, not anti-Zionist, yes, there’s a difference, I don’t wanna do this whole shtick rn, I mean content that is bigoted against Jews as a whole, not just anti-Israel).
It’s exhausting to see, because that’s exactly how these Nazi extremists justify themselves and normalize their attitudes within different communities and they’re falling for it.
Exactly. Carlson says what is useful to expand his audience, and treating him like a reasonable person is the trap that he wants people to fall into.
He was giving Nick Fuentes tips on how to be more mainstream just a few months ago.
Considering the bulk of your “arguments” were either “chicken shit coward” or more simply “coward”, I’m gonna go with YDI.
And if you already knew a place has a history of something you don’t like, and you ho into that place guns a blazing, you don’t have any right to go all shocked pikachu when you get thrown out on your ass, especially when all you did amounted to throwing a tantrum.
I already said I wasn’t mad about being banned, and I deserved it.
And I wasn’t arguing, because he wasn’t. I asked why he posted it, and he deflected like a chickenshit coward.
I’m pointing out here that there are moderation problems with the community claiming to be “progressive” while hosting Nazi propaganda.
That was the point? That was an awful lot of complaining about why you were banned and not enough focus on what you say you’re trying to point out, which still doesn’t make sense given that posting a link does not automatically constitute support for said viewpoint. It’s a political forum meant for discussion. You dove straight into name calling from your top comment. Again, YDI.
And until you can actually demonstrate a bad faith argument on either the poster or the community, saying someone is “chicken shit coward” for not wanting to engage someone who comes out of the gate swinging, you won’t convince me otherwise.
As far as I’m concerned, your argument is lost based on your attitude.
👍🏻
It is a perfectly fine thing to use the enemy’s words to sow disruption amongst the enemy - it’s pretty much SOP in the propaganda business.
However, depending on the audience, this should always be placed in the proper context.
Why this wasn’t done in this particular instance seems merely to confirm my (thoroughly justified) biases against these (so-called) “progressives” (ie, edgy liberals cosplaying as leftists) who would happily accept people like Carlson back into the fold as long as he hides his raging white supremacism behind appropriate liberal political decorum.
Anti colonization is progessive.
That doesn’t make Tucker Carlson a progressive
I am not saying that he is a progressive. Just saying his opposition to the genocide is. I think we should still condemn him when he say supermasist things
Although you did not literally say that, you have implied it by association several times.
You also strongly defend one single idea that is only progressive when compared to, as you put it, the worst genocide in history. A pretty low bar, in my opinion. Yet everything else Tucker Carlson supports, the man’s entire identity, is as anti-progressive as one can be.
Edit: corrected spelling
Israel is explicitly talking about exterminating Palestinians. It is a very low bar to minimize the situation
nobody is minimizing anything-- and if you have to keep using extreme comparisons like hitler and Palestinian genocide just to make Tucker Carlson look like a progressive, you’ve made my point for me.
Being against genocide isn’t a progressive idea. It’s just a human one.
Another idiot who selectively read my comment. I never said Tucker is progressive.
Resorting to ad hominem attacks when you lose an argument is not the winning move.
Oh, and I already told you this in another comment when you “didn’t say that Tucker Carlson is a progressive”:
Although you did not literally say that, you have implied it by association several times.
You also strongly defend one single idea that is only progressive when compared to, as you put it, the worst genocide in history. A pretty low bar, in my opinion. Yet everything else Tucker Carlson supports, the man’s entire identity, is as anti-progressive as one can be.
Your argument is full of logical flaws, and now you’ve started to repeat yourself. I guess I have to start reminding you of the mistakes you already made in your argument
Absolutely.
But that’s not what Carlson Promotes.
Opposing all aids to a colonial power is progressive which he does. I agree that everything else he promote is terrible and dangerous
The why matters. He’s not opposing aid because he’s anti-genocide or anti-colonization. Just because his success might support the same goal as progressives doesn’t mean he’s doing something progressive.
It’s like praising someone who opposes the Proud Boys because they have a Hispanic figurehead. Anti-racists might seek to use them to achieve a positive result, but that doesn’t mean the person is practicing anti-racism even on a very limited scale.
There are some people who are conservative on a lot of things but legitimately progressive on a few others, but that’s not what’s happening here with Carlson.
The situation in Palestine is so dire that you need people from all ideologies and political affiliation to do the job in going after Israel propaganda . I don’t want Israel to finish it’s plan to ethnically cleansing all Palestinians from the river to the sea . I want evangelical to stop voting for Israel . Let’s use Tucker as an useful idiot . Let’s keep talking about his supremacist without tying it up with the genocide .
Adolf Hitler supported social welfare, an ostensibly progressive idea, but only for people he deemed worthy.
This did not make him a progressive nor would those programs be appropriate to share in a community about progressive politics were they contemporary.
Tucker might oppose military aid to Israel, but his ideology isn’t anticolonialism, it’s nationalist. He isn’t opposed to colonialism, he’s lamenting resources being sent overseas when they could be used to promote nationalist goals in America. His ideology similarly shouldn’t be in any community for the promotion of progressive politcs.
If you bristle at the idea of referencing Adolf Hitler, you can find similar examples throughout the history of fascism. Even if a fascist seems to align with goals ostensibly for the benefit of the masses, their goals are perverse and this alignment is specifically meant to manipulate uncritically thinking people into supporting their twisted views.
Hitler commites the worst genocide in history. Tucker didn’t
So, just because Tucker Carlson didn’t commit the worst genocide in history, he’s a progressive?
I think your logic is a little bit flawed there
No. His stand for palestine is progressive. Everything else is not.
It very much isn’t. Especially when you hold it in the context of the rest of his politics and social views.
That is correct, but Tucker spends time, effort and money promoting proponents of similar goals in American media. My point is not “Tucker Carlson is just as bad as Hitler”, but that fascists and nationalists may spout ostensibly progressive ideals but they do not have progressive goals.
Furthermore, it’s dangerous to ignore that fact and promote the snippets of their ideology that align with progressive ideals because it normalizes and gives power to their platform, which may align with you in this one small instance, but is pitted against you when looked at as a whole.
So post article and video about Tucker supermasism
Dude… what??
How about you explain what benefit it has to progressive politics to laud Tucker’s position against America arming Israel?
No, he is just a White Nationalist who reputation-launders genocide deniers like Daryl Cooper and gives propaganda advice to straight-up Nazis like Nick Fuentes.
I am not going to defend his supermasism and his promotion of dangerous ideas
Why defend him at all? He’s an absolute piece of shit who is your ideological enemy (if you are anti-colonialist).
That must be why he loves Putin so much. He just hates colonialism!
deleted by creator
Putin is an imperialist. Take Ukraine, for example: he does not wish to colonize Ukraine. He wishes to conquer it.
Do you realize that conquering mean military occupation or colonization?
I know that conquering and colonization do not mean the same thing, and Putin hasn’t done either yet.
