Soon after I joined Lemmy a few years ago, I searched for communities based on my interests and subscribed to the ones with the highest numbers of users to ensure they are active. Sometimes I joined multiple, but then saw that some people post the same thing to more than one, cluttering my feed, so I left the smaller ones.

It’s only after my community ban from !games@hexbear.net for disagreeing about Ukraine that I was told about MeanwhileOnGrad, learning exactly what “the tankie triad” means and why big Lemmy instances have defederated from those. Lemmy.ml, where the ML probably stands for Marxist-Leninist, seems to have been defederated by fewer, possibly because it’s run by the creator of Lemmy, Dessalines. Nevertheless, there is evidence of Dessalines holding the same authoritarian communist views as the rest.

Recently, there were two posts on !privacy@lemmy.ml about Signal, but then in both cases, admin davel (who is known on MoG for seeing CIA’s hand in running Ukraine, among other things) and Dessalines linked (1, 2, 3) the same article by Dessalines, which not only argues Signal could be a CIA honeypot (as if it matters when proper e2ee is used), but also manages to shoehorn China even into that, claiming its government “prefers autonomy”. This sort of portrayal of totalitarianism as sovereignty is the reason I unsubscribed from the community. As it has been said by others, ML is not a neutral instance but a means of pushing authoritarian views onto unsuspecting users.

Edit: Made the post title clearer.

  • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    19 hours ago

    You linked to a section of a Wikipedia article which cites the opinion of the Japanese Communist Party where they don’t call China imperialist. In the same document that’s cited they call the US imperialist repeatedly. Why do you expect anyone to take you seriously when the evidence you’re using to support your argument is so incredibly weak?

    • XLE@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Pretty dishonest of you to misrepresent what they actually do say.

      • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        Stop projecting. The JCP did not call China imperialist. They did call the US imperialist. Feel free to prove me wrong but we both know you can’t.

        • XLE@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 hour ago

          They used synonyms, troll.

          the Japanese Communist Party (JCP) criticized the CCP for engaging in “great-power chauvinism and hegemonism”

          • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 hour ago

            They repeatedly call the US imperialist but they did not use that word to describe China. It should be obvious then that if they intended to call China imperialist they would have. Unfortunately for you, insults aren’t a substitute for poor reading comprehension.