this post was submitted on 07 Jun 2023
2 points (100.0% liked)

lemmy.ml meta

1440 readers
11 users here now

Anything about the lemmy.ml instance and its moderation.

For discussion about the Lemmy software project, go to [email protected].

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This was originally posted to lemmy.pineapplemachine.com: https://lemmy.pineapplemachine.com/post/5781

It has also been posted to lemmy.ca: https://lemmy.ca/post/591991


Lemmy is federated and decentralized and that means that we can all coexist regardless of our differing political opinions. I think it's important to preface this by saying that I am not offended by or concerned with anyone's politics, and I'm certainly not here to argue with anyone about them.

My concern is that users are being banned and content is being removed on lemmy.ml citing a rule that is not publicly stated anywhere that I have seen.

Moderators of lemmy.ml are removing posts and comments which are critical of the Chinese government and are banning their authors.

This came to my attention because of how lemmy user bans are federated just like everything else, and I was confused about why my instance had logged a lemmy.ml user ban citing "orientalism" as the reason for the ban.

Screenshot of my own instance's modlog, as viewed by an admin

I noticed that the banned user had recently commented on a post in [email protected] that had been removed with the reason "Orientalist article".

Screenshot of banned user's history on lemmy.ml

Screenshot of lemmy.ml modlog

Here's the article that was removed, titled "China may face succession crisis". It was published by axios.com, which mediabiasfactcheck describes as having "a slight to moderate liberal bias" and gives its second-highest ranking for factual reporting. The article writes unfavorably of Chinese President Xi Jinping.

https://www.axios.com/2023/06/06/china-may-face-succession-crisis

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/axios/

I had not remembered seeing anything in lemmy.ml's rules that would suggest that "orientalism"—meaning, as I understand it, the depiction or discussion of Asian cultures by people in Western ones—was against the rules. So I checked, and I found that there was not. Not on the instance's front page, and not in [email protected].

Screenshot of instance rules for lemmy.ml

[Screenshot of community rules for [email protected]](https://lemmy.pineapplemachine.com/pictrs/image/9a5a8a2d-cfac-4658-8ef5-77a885079756.png)

There is a stated rule against xenophobia, but I think that xenophobia is not widely understood to include Westerners writing critically of the actions of an Asian government.

This is where I went from confused to concerned.

Lemmy instances have public moderation logs, which I think is a very positive thing about the platform. So I looked more closely at lemmy.ml's moderation log.

Please note that moderation logs are also federated. It's hard to be 100% sure which instance a mod action is actually associated with, looking at these logs. The previously mentioned user ban and post removal were, I think, definitely actions taken by lemmy.ml moderators. My own instance's mod log identifies the banning moderator as a lemmy.ml admin, and the removed post was submitted to a lemmy.ml community. I've done my best to verify that all of the following removals were really done by lemmy.ml moderators, but I can't be absolutely certain. Please forgive me if any of them were actually made on other instances that do have an explicitly stated rule against orientalism.

Removed Comment Ah yes. Being against China's racist genocide is racist. China, the imperialist ethno-state, is clearly innocent. by @[email protected] reason: Orientalism

Screenshot of lemmy.ml modlog

Removed Comment Lol. Thinking some countries have better governments than others is supremacist? Whatever, dude. By the way. If there are any countries with decent governments, I don't know of them. But like. If there were decent countries, they wouldn't behave like China. by @[email protected] reason: Orientalism

Screenshot of lemmy.ml modlog

These following moderator actions did not specifically cite orientalism, but did not seem to be breaking any of the instance's or community's explicitly stated rules.

Banned @[email protected] reason: Only makes anti russia and anti china, crosspostst from reddit. 2nd temp ban expires: 9d ago

Screenshot of lemmy.ml modlog

Removed Comment Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia and Tibet are all Colonies of China, which it treats as Colonial Territories, by - Forcibly destroying the local culture. Forcefully extracting to harm of the locals. Genocide, abuse, kidnapping, rape. But there is no point in engaging to you. You are a liar. You know you are. When you deny genocides, you put yourself on the same side as the fascists and reactionaries of the past. by @[email protected] reason: Rule 1 and 2

Screenshot of lemmy.ml modlog

I have no affection for the Chinese government and I do not call myself a communist. I would not enforce a rule against orientalism on my own instance. But I think that lemmy.ml's moderators are entitled to enforce whatever rules they please. It's only that, as the largest single lemmy instance so far, I believe that they have an obligation to disclose these rules, and an obligation to not ban users or remove content for failing to follow unobvious and unstated rules.

I'd like to raise some awareness about this, and I'd like to openly ask the moderators of lemmy.ml to state the rules that they intend to enforce clearly and explicitly.

I will be very clear and state it again: I am not asking for anyone to change their opinions or to not enforce a rule that they believe in. That is the great thing about lemmy, that we can coexist in this federated community even when we don't share the same opinions. What I am asking is for lemmy.ml's rules to be clearly stated, because I think it does not reflect well on the broader community if the predominant instance moderates its users and content according to rules that are not being explicitly disclosed.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

"orientalism"—meaning, as I understand it, the depiction or discussion of Asian cultures by people in Western ones

That's not what is meant here.

Since the publication of Edward Said's Orientalism in 1978, much academic discourse has begun to use the term "Orientalism" to refer to a general patronizing Western attitude towards Middle Eastern, Asian, and North African societies.

So this would fall under the "no bigotry" rule.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

This is the case, yes. Orientalism is the condescending and patronizing attitude (think rudyard kipling) many westerners (especially those from the US, who have been pumped full of sinophobia non-stop since the trade war began) towards other peoples they view as inferior. Anything from a Middle-eastern, Chinese, Indian, or Russian source is seen as illegitimate, evil, sinister, "authoritarian", whereas anything from a western source is seen as cultured, measured, dignified, etc. Its 100% an instance of breaking rule 1: no bigotry, and alienates most of the people on the planet.

Side point, but I was watching a documentary from 2011 (I think inside job? about the 2008 financial crisis), before the trade war began, and its night and day. Not a single negative thing said about the PRC, and this was just a few years ago.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

whereas anything from a western source is seen as cultured, measured, dignified, etc.

No leftist has ever believed that, and it is a bad faith argument.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

It's not that they "believe" it, but it's a glaring blind spot that takes time to be acknowledged and contended with.

You can go out and be the biggest leftist of all and support LGBT rights, universal healthcare, whatever, but it's not like people understand every page of socialist theory and worldview on Day 1. There are many Western leftists at this early stage who have not studied topics like the Chinese Revolution (for instance) from a socialist perspective. Naturally, they are going to tend to repeat liberal talking points until they've done that.

Sure they one can be a "leftist" who is fighting for "the right thing", but for me, I know that I have grown massively in my understanding of the world (modern and historical), and continue to do so. I assuredly have blind spots of my own that I have yet to deal with.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (2 children)

but for me, I know that I have grown massively in my understanding of the world (modern and historical), and continue to do so. I assuredly have blind spots of my own that I have yet to deal with.

This is basically where I am. I've learned a lot in my years to see that the world is very complex and nuanced and many assumptions I had were completely baseless. I've come to the conclusion that I am far too ignorant of the history and geopolitics of the USSR/China to really feel like I have an informed opinion that isn't influenced by cold war propaganda. And I just have not had the time to rectify that yet.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Totally, and once you get there you can and should have criticisms of both countries and how they have operated and the decisions their leaders have made. It's not that they are above criticism, but its exhausting to hear criticisms from people who obviously haven't done their homework and they let the propaganda (seated in racism/orientalism/whatever Red Scare shit) do the talking.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

but its exhausting to hear criticisms from people who obviously haven't done their homework and they let the propaganda (seated in racism/orientalism/whatever Red Scare shit) do the talking.

Yep. This is why I'm really leaning more on the side of the mods and general culture on this instance (and others) than the users flinging loaded language and spreading FUD about the platform.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

the users flinging loaded language and spreading FUD about the platform.

Extremely dorky to do that on a federated site. Set up an instance and federate.

Nobody seems to give a shit that all major social media is owned by sketchy billionaires who actually have the power to fuck shit up, but one FOSS developer is an ardent communist (but not known to be a member of any org or party where he could actually do anything (no offense)), and all of a sudden that somehow is an issue for just using the software (as intended by the dev!)

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It's fine to acknowledge tat you don't have the background information.

Just trust the consensus and intersecting beliefs and analysis of professional academics and historians over internet tankies. Because one group lies more than the other, and it isn't the academics.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago

Some of the very first articles I read that pushed me toward leftism were The Responsibility of Intellectuals and Manufacturing Consent. So no I'm not apt to blindly accept the consensus of academics and Western elites without looking at it as closely as I can.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago

I'm not saying blind spots don't exist. What I was doing is calling out a genocide denier for using bad-faith arguments.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago

If you are a leftist, I am Mao Zedong. Stop pretending to be a leftist while all your posting reveals you being in the other direction.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Being critical of a totalitarian and Imperialist ethnostate - by which I mean the Chinese state - is not bigotry.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Do you know what the most common profession for members of the NPC, the national people's congress, the main governing body of the PRC, is? Industrial engineer

Guess what the most common profession is for liberal democracies? Lawyers.

I don't say this because I don't like lawyers 🤣 , I have one in the family. I say it only to point out that most of what you've learned about China, is coming through a heavy media filter, from a media who only seeks to demonize a country they're in a trade war with.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

In fairness, before I walked onto Tiananmen Square when visiting China, my local guide strongly implied that we should not mention anything but weddings or vacation spots (no massacre) if we didn't want to be arrested.

Being there was surreal and terrifying. Police with shotguns everywhere. The level of authoritative oppression is worse than visiting a small town in the South.

The "heavy media filter" represents exactly what I experienced as a young&dumb tourist who didn't know about any media filter in the first place.

EDIT: More info. Every time I walked past banks, or any possibly-questionable spot... police/soldiers with shotguns. Sure it's a culture difference, but I live in the most gun-friendly country in the world and their authorities walk around packing heavy weapons. And the complete lack of public protest was noticable and staggering. All I have to do in the US to see protest is drive down any highway. In China? Nothing.

EDIT2: And hey. I've worked with dozens of Chinese expats. You know what they all have in common? They would never live in China again. Mostly because of how oppressive they feel the government is. A lot of coworkers were "rural Chinese" and were second-class citizens behind the "urban Chinese" (confirmed by expats from the latter who were friends/coworkers with the former). The former had a passport that excluded them from entering cities because they weren't "good enough". The latter had passports to go anywhere.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago

China has 1.4 billion people. Do you really think they have the ability and/or need to "squash" protests and prevent any protest from ever happening? No. They have a healthy democracy where people are involved in voicing their opinions, and protesting if it ever comes to that. Please stop ingesting so much xenophobic propaganda and learn more about the countries of which you speak

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Actually, a lot of what I've learned about China comes from books written by Chinese people and scholars.

Since you're engaging with me, I'll ask you.

Is there a genocide in Xinjiang? I'm ready to hear your evasion and denials.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Most of the world disagrees with you, especially the middle east:

Are what those countries saying untrustworthy?

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I say it only to point out that most of what you’ve learned about China, is coming through a heavy media filter, from a media who only seeks to demonize a country they’re in a trade war with.

Most of the world disagrees with you, especially the middle east

China is an important and powerful trading partner to many countries, so there is an incentive not to speak up. If you are skeptical about the western media, I think you should also be skeptical about the stance of these governments.

To me the situation in Xinjiang is very concerning because humanitarian organizations like Amnesty International speak out against the treatment of Uygurs. I think they don't have a reason to turn a blind eye like many of these governments do. And quite a few of them don't seem to be bothered by human rights violations, violating them themselves in horrific ways. Looking at you, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Russia, Syria etc.

Again, I agree that the west has a political motive to slander China. And the west also does and has done horrible things. But I don't think the same goes for humanitarian organizations.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

A lot of these western "humanitarian / rights" orgs, came out of the cold war, as part of an active effort to carry out regime change against socialist states and stop the spread of communism. Amnesty international for example was co-founded by someone who worked for british intelligence, and its other founder had close links to the FBI, and even had a hand in the FBI killing of Fred Hampton.

https://www.mintpressnews.com/amnesty-international-troubling-collaboration-with-uk-us-intelligence/253939/

I trust what Muslim and global south countries, as well as the Uyghur people themselves have to say about their treatment, and not these western "human-rights-complex" orgs hailing from countries who have done nothing but bomb the middle east for 60+ years.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think you're being downvoted because the general belief here is that reeducation isn't happening and that there is no solid evidence that it is. I'm also not very knowledgeable here though, so take this with a grain of salt.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

The downvotes are from you seemingly maliciously misinterpreting the point, specifically that it was the people in re-education that are glad they are there and not what was actually said, that the global Muslim population seems to largely support the re-education. By its very nature, we would expect very few people to be glad they are there -- especially while they are there -- but we would expect many Uighurs in the region to be glad that those people are re-educated, as the broader population of Uighurs in the region are the main group victimized by the many terrorist attacks that this crackdown was in response to. That is to say nothing of what Muslims elsewhere in the world think and why because I don't understand that topic enough.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Alright, it could just be poor reading comprehension. Sorry for assuming.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

the Chinese government especially isn’t renown to be tender

You were just explaining about the saturation of bias and then you retreated back to vibes. Those vibes came from somewhere.

the hard line is if people were killed, families destroyed, and/or people traumatized.

"Trauma" can be a rather hard thing to define, but I agree in any case that these would all be serious problems. In fact, these things have been serious problems in the terror attacks that incited the program. Some of those attacks had extreme levels of fatality and they overwhelmingly targeted normal citizens (and not, say, police stations or military bases or government buildings). The cost of action is important to consider, but so is the cost of inaction.

In the program itself, people weren't killed unless you count return fire during those terror attacks. To call families "destroyed" when these were all temporary interventions that allowed maintained family contact (and usually returning home on weekends) would be a contortion. "Trauma" is something that will always be produced from a large-scale program in one way or another, and could thereby be used to condemn virtually any program if you leave it merely as "was anyone traumatized?" Trauma should be minimized, but variance exists. To use the most benign possible example as a starting point, a kid who loves his father [who is unrelatedly a Jihadist] is probably going to feel pretty shitty if that father is taken away from him for two years, but that does not mean his life will experience a net negative when you factor in his father returning to him after being rehabilitated from militant Salafism.

Just things to consider.

I can see what you're saying with the last part about timing. Given that concern:

Dessalines, along with around 5 other contributors, maintains a collection of sources on various topics, and Xinjiang is among them. That could be one way of investigating his stance on the topic and information he finds relevant (though idk which parts are his versus the other contributors')

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

Thanks for the link. That is a lot of material...

Also, totally unrelated, but my browser didn't honor the anchor focus when opening the page, and I didn't notice you linked to a subpart directly, so only opened the first immediate topic (I don't know about the others), and that topic is, unfortunately, irrational: it is meant to be about "communism, in theory vs practice" (which is a topic that really interests me), and instead it serves an objective "not as bad as" moral equivalence fallacy, about capitalism, instead of the expected topic. I hope the rest of the text isn't so irrational. I will have a look later, I am curious about the topic of the Uyghurs, now.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

I haven't read that part because the "didn't communism fail?" bugbear is a cold war relic, but looking at the very first link in that subsection, I believe it's a matter of poor formatting, since it does address the achievements of the USSR starting with this paragraph (so you can ctrl+f):

Examples from this post by /u/bayarea415, Stephen Gowans - Do publicly owned, planned economies work, Ian Goodrum - Socialism vs Capitalism and quality of life, and yogthos's USSR acheivements post about the USSR specifically:

And gives a bullet-pointed list of linked topics, e.g.:

USSR had a more nutritious diet than the US, according to the CIA. Calories consumed surpassed the US. source. Ended famines.

Had the 2nd fastest growing economy of the 20th century after Japan. The USSR started out at the same level of economic development and population as Brazil in 1920, which makes comparisons to the US, an already industrialized country by the 1920s, even more spectacular.

etc., typically with one or two links per bullet-point.

I can forgive him that much because there is a huge amount of information one needs to organize in order to even begin to address the endlessly litany of (often totally baseless) accusations that get so casually thrown at communists.

Edit: Also, this is just the first link. Skipping the second because it is Reddit, the second is the bullet point:

Do Publicly Owned, Planned Economies Work?, audiobook

Which is what it says on the tin:

The Soviet Union was a concrete example of what a publicly owned, planned economy could produce: full employment, guaranteed pensions, paid maternity leave, limits on working hours, free healthcare and education (including higher education), subsidized vacations, inexpensive housing, low-cost childcare, subsidized public transportation, and rough income equality. Most of us want these benefits. However, are they achievable permanently? It is widely believed that while the Soviet Union may have produced these benefits, in the end, Soviet public ownership and planning proved to be unworkable. Otherwise, how to account for the country’s demise? Yet, when the Soviet economy was publicly owned and planned, from 1928 to 1989, it reliably expanded from year to year, except during the war years.

And it goes on at length, hence being paired with an "audiobook" version. It does bring up capitalism because such comparison is inevitable (and, I believe, quite necessary), but it is more focused on the topic of your interest, as the title indicates.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)
[–] [email protected] -3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CGQeF62zdCc

Come back after 90 minutes of learning facts about this topic. Also, your wink in the edit is really giving you away.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] -2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Edit: this video seems to be targeted at americans. Which I am not. I am not interested into watching a video to learn things from a context I do not have.

You do not need to be an American citizen to be culturally American. You could be culturally Westernised even if you lived in Indonesia or Pakistan. This video is not targeted at Americans, but anyone who believes in Uyghur genocide propaganda wholly funded and invented by CIA to attempt a Mujahideen 2.0 insurrection in North-West China.

If you think that is too much, here is something that will be an eye opener, a CIA head's AMA. https://web.archive.org/web/20200924183937/https://old.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/hwi7ub/i_am_sophie_richardson_china_director_at_human/

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)
[–] [email protected] 0 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

A map like that isn't really reflective of any substance. Do you know what most maps of the US look like when defining political opinions by states? It's a sea of red. But it clearly doesn't tell a valid picture of popular support. And I'm not even arguing that makes any particular opinion more valid or not, all I'm saying is that its very easily misleading depending on what narrative you want to sell.

https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/E7LSY66ODVCFHEVJ7TTGJKPHSU.jpg

Clearly the vast majority of the country supported Trump based on that map...Except that's not true.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 2 years ago

Are you dismissing information about plight of Uyghur Muslims even though Muslim countries of the world found no issue with it? How does majority of the world support Trump with that map, and why are you distorting and misrepresenting information to armtwist the narrativr?