To clarify, since this topic is something that I have experienced quite a lot over my two months here, now: I do not have any problem whatsoever with tankie/communist/leftist politics. I also don't have a problem with people discussing them.

What I do have a problem with is:

• ad hom attacks calling me a "lib" when I question whether authoritarianism on the left is really much better than authoritarianism on the right
• unequal moderation, ie. being banned/having comments deleted for giving the same bitchy energy I receive over the course of a debate, without the same enforcement of the other user
• having a long conversation, in good faith, about politics, media, and disinformation, including providing sources and reading sources in return, with mods and then finding the entire thread deleted because I said something critical of China, or insisted on alternative, nongovernmental sources for news
• having these activities result in bans from subs that I have never commented in, and being unable to appeal or understand them

And I think it's ok to think that these practices are inherently bad for a social media platform, and working with others to advocate against those practices.

The article discusses this.

This is the result of the PiS, Law & Justice Party, the previous right wing dickbags that constantly undermined rule of law who was voted out (pretty resoundingly, as I understand it) in 2023.

Tusk, the current PM of Poland, has made promises and provided an action plan to bring Poland back into compliance with Article 7, some of which are currently under way.

The EC has acknowledged this change of circumstances and subsequently ratcheted down its own response, releasing some of the previously withheld funds, for which it was necessary for Poland to be released from Article 7 in the meantime.

Cite the people who already quoted the source (The internet, as cited in Lemmy, 2024).

I mean… yes you do, since that’s a little bit how international law works? Countries who do not sign and ratify the Rome statute and then remain in there aren’t governed by the ICC in the same way.

You will see in the excerpt you quoted, the reason the ICC believes it has jurisdiction is because of events taking place in Palestine, which has taken part in the Rome Statute previously.

And the United States has a law that says it will militarily invade The Hague if any US service member is arrested and held by the court. It came about along with all the other legislative bullshit in the years after 9/11/01. The US had previously been a founding member of the ICC, but withdrew for reasons of sovereignty.

Indeed. That’s why I asked the question.

Say what you will about how fucking stupid American foreign policy is and has been, but it’s at least somewhat tempered its approach to socialist governments around the world.

Have you ever considered good faith argumentation? Do you have the ability to present your views coherently and without vitriol?

… to what?

Are you suggesting we’re still waiting for the real Russian military to show up?

Or are you suggesting Russian deployment of tactical nuclear weapons?

Or is there another way that Russia could further escalate I can’t think of?

Too hip to sit down.

[edit since I can’t resist: the correct thing would be a “hoopy frood”, not dude. I’m sorry, the superfan in me got out.]

“Overstand?”

I saw this on another instance, so I figure it’s ok if I repost my response to that here, too.

From mediabiasfactcheck.com

“Founded in 2005, La Nueva Televisora del Sur (teleSUR, English: The New Television Station of the South) is a multi-state funded, pan–Latin American terrestrial and satellite television network sponsored by the governments of Venezuela, Cuba, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Uruguay, and Bolivia that is headquartered in Caracas, Venezuela. TeleSUR has been accused of being a propaganda tool for Hugo Chavez and his successors.”

It’s not deemed to be a credible source given its direct governmental control and routine lack of transparency in its sources, if it provides any sources whatsoever.

There is also a long list of provably false reporting from this website.

I’m not saying that these kinds of actions don’t take place, just that this source is not reliable and I would guess that systemic theft from an incredibly scrutinized entity in a hostile country would be subject to a little bit more widespread reporting and corroborating evidence.