Comment on Dbzero has Defederated from Feddit.org following its Governance post about the later's Zionist Bar Problem

• CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Yeah, the good old “You are a Nazi for following rules”-thing. Because everyone who follows rules does so indly, except for oneself.

  source

  • Diva@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    One may well ask: “How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?” The answer lies in the fact that there are two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the first to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that “an unjust law is no law at all.”

    • Martin Luther King Jr. in Birmingham Jail 1963

    source

    • CyberEgg@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      How would you categorize the community rules “Be nice to each other”, “Don’t insult each other” and “Don’t call for violence”? Just or unjust, dair or unfair, sensible or dumb, expedient or not?

      source

      • Diva@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

        How would you categorize the feddit.org admin using a snark comm get people to send DM harrassment to users who upvoted the feddit.org defederation thread?

        is that ‘being nice’?

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • Uruanna@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

        Easy: unjust, unfair, dumb.

        Nazis easily pretend to be the nice people following the rules and if you get angry you’re the bad one. Don’t be nice to Nazis. Yell at them, insult them, punch them. Enforcing laws to protect oppressors is nothing more than protecting oppressors. “The only legitimate violence is state violence” and all that propaganda.

        The Nazis are the ones breaking the “be nice” rule in the first place, they just do it while speaking nicely, they talk about enforcing rules and protecting order, but somehow they always dodge the question of how many people their order is killing. That’s not being nice. The rule is only there to forbid you for fighting back.

        If you think that the “be nice” rule should punish calls to take down Israel or contest german support for the genocide, but not punish that same support for the genocide because it’s nice and polite… You’re just protecting the genocide. It doesn’t matter if anti-genocide comments are not nice enough for you - they shouldn’t have to be nice. Especially not when the German government literally makes it illegal to denounce Israel, even nicely.

        source
• lmmarsano@group.lt ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

  Cool non-answer. What part of civility rules typical across lemmy such as dbzer0’s own

  Don’t be shitty. i.e. telling people to kill themselves, or bad-jacketing is bannable.

  allow exceptions for unhinged promotion of violence against commenters whom we unreasonably allege or “bad-jacket” as Zionist? Uncivil denunciations of Zionism are uncivil; therefore, moderators enforcing civility must prosecute. No evidence was given the moderators penalize civil denunciations of Zionism. Enforcing civility doesn’t imply Zionism.

  This is basic logic. Denying basic logic implies staggering stupidity or dishonesty.

  source

  • Diva@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

    Dbzer0 civility rules aim to protect marginalized people from harassment. feddit.org’s are being deployed to protect Zionism from criticism while tone-policing Palestinians and their allies. These aren’t the same thing just because they both use the word ‘civility.’

    feddit isn’t exactly enforcing civility neutrally. They’re silencing anti-Zionism while treating Zionist positions as the default that deserves civil engagement. That’s a political choice with the fig leaf of ‘just following orders the law’, hardly ‘basic logic’. But thanks for explaining to a silly girl like me silly-liberator

    source

    • luciferofastora@feddit.org ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago

      Aside from the fact that following the law should be an understandable concession to wanting your instance to continue existing:

      I don’t think I’ve seen any Anti-Palestine sentiment there. I’m also pretty sure most of us are on the same page about Zionism. This dispute is about the way that we express it, which is being framed as defending it and compared to actively perpetrating genocide.

      There is a significant difference between following laws about hatespeech and following orders to actually murder people. Erasing all nuance doesn’t help the actual discourse about what we all agree is systematic genocide against the Palestinian people.

      source