That is itself a political belief, though. You cannot in fact have any sort of community without answering political questions about how that community should work. You could say that no external political questions should be discussed in the community, but:
This is what is known as the "Chewbacca Offense"
Keep your enemies close. Like Hitler, whom one keeps in one's car.
I'm not sure it's feasible to try and compare the two in an objective way. It's easy to know which oppressive empire one personally prefers, but trying to actually reach consensus on which was better or worse using some kind of convincing evidence would be so complicated that it would probably amount to a waste of everyone's time.
My view of the socialist position on China is that it is not "the Chinese state is good", but rather "stop being mean to Chinese people".
China is an empire, and socialists hate empires. But the US is also an empire (in that there's a core that gets all the good stuff and a periphery that gets the good stuff extracted from it, which for the US is often places not technically in the country but in practice obligated to listen to it). So when the US comes in all scandalized and decides that what we really need to do to save people from the Chinese empire is to make sure that US companies don't lose market share in GPU computing, and can manufacture solar panels at competitive prices, and that people get their short videos from Instagram Reels and not TikTok, the socialists are very suspicious. The net result looks a lot more like imperial protectionism and/or racism than a coherent anti-imperial program.
I'm not sure why this ends up as a socialist talking point? Maybe because the nonsense of the policies seems obvious? Maybe because it seems like warmongering and wars are terrible and so it must be stopped at once? Maybe just to get a break from telling people that they should probably make sure people have houses?
Defederating instances on ideological grounds isn't a bad idea IMHO, and I can see why people might not want their feeds to end up full of people who just sort of assume that what we're here to do is use facts and logic to destroy western propaganda, with the goal of bringing about the downfall of the International Monetary Fund. That sounds like an extremely tiring project to be involved in; you wouldn't want to hang out with somebody who does that in every thread.
But I think it's important for the reason here to be that Hexbear is embarking on a project of ideological warfare. Not that the community consensus there is that the IMF is a bad idea. A load of communists is probably fine, while a load of evangelical communists determined to exactly follow the letter of every rule while maximizing the amount that they can evangelize is probably not fine.
You could try Google. Most big email and calendar apps will support their nonstandard login flow.
I subscribed to too many YouTubes. Then I tried to watch all the good videos from the YouTubes I was subscribed to.
I can sort of almost keep up? If I go and watch YouTube constantly I can clear like 6 months' backlog in 2 months. But then at the end of the 2 months I'm like, was all that stuff really any better than the new stuff that's showing up today? Or than the other stuff I would have been watching or listening to? And the answer is really no.
So I think next time I take an interest in YouTube I'm not going to try and clear the backlog. It's not like it won't be there later; if I hear of a great video, I can go and watch it. And anything that won't be there latter is deliberately designed to exclude me, so why would I want it?
Whatever you decide to participate in, you're participating in that thing. You can't actually participate in anything if you keep going around trying to participate in everything at once.
I see 402 users per day in [email protected] according to the my instance shows me.
Granted that's going to be one of the biggest ones, but that's not a small number of people to visit somewhere in a day.
It's not that bad out of the box but can be customized with drop-ins.
And the frame is made of people delivering each other avocado toast.
What does it even mean to be "against NATO"? Is it, like, saying "the NATO alliance ought to disband because the terms of the alliance are bad for my country actually"? Is it like "I hope NATO countries lose all their wars"? Or like "NATO is a dangerous thing to exist because it allows an invasion of Country X, which is likely to happen, to result in a global thermonuclear war"?
A bunch of countries could be arming Ukraine without the sort of all-for-one, one-for-all terms of NATO specifically that make it likely to figure prominently in any explanation for why we have all died of nuclear weapons.