• 0 Posts
  • 12 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: January 9th, 2026

help-circle



  • flamingleg@lemmy.mltoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world..?
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 days ago

    It is routinely claimed that the ‘tankman’ was killed by the tank right after the clip that is usually shown ends. The full video shows that he left along with others who convinced him to leave. You might not be making that claim, but that was what the anti-chinese propaganda claimed for decades.

    The burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that the massacre in fact happened. What exists in video form is a man standing in front of a tank and then NOT being killed. Despite many many lies sugfesting otherwise. It seems like you don’t participate in that particular lie, while still uncritically accepting the rest of the narrative. Perhaps if one major detail of the story is false other details of the story are also false? i guess we’ll just have to trust that the same three-letter agencies who have every reason and motive to undermine chinese sovereignty are in this particular case trustworthy.

    I mention the burning to death of unarmed police to illustrate to you which side was the more violent and unrestrained. Violence which is characteristic of foreign regime-change operations and hybrid warfare.

    I want to defund the police and reform the organisation to serve the people, there’s enough room within this worldview to not be burning cops alive (and i must stress again that they were not armed with lethal force).

    You say that you aren’t a normie but then uncritically accept an obviously distorted version of history which has been constructed to serve western imperial interests.

    Maybe you’re an operator who does actually know the truth but lies about it professionally. In that case i’m sorry for inaccurately describing you as a normie, when really you would be a glowie.

    but just in case you are actually just a normie in denial here’s a thing to read


  • flamingleg@lemmy.mltoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world..?
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 days ago

    So if you’ve watched the full ‘tankman’ footage you would know that he wasn’t killed by a tank or by anything else in that video. You can believe decades and decades of breathless propaganda coming directly out of the NED and the other usual characters, or you can believe your own lying eyes.

    It’s sufficient to assume that if this one important image was essentially a lie, then many other aspects of the story are also manufactured. For example did you know that many dozens of police officers (who were unarmed) were burnt to death by the student protestors? did you know that the leaders of the student protests were coordinating with and were paid by western intelligence agencies? Did you know that literally nancy pelosi was on the ground during those protests?

    do you know anything other than what imperialist propaganda has directed you to ‘know’?

    I’d rather be a tankie than a normie


  • flamingleg@lemmy.mltoLemmy Shitpost@lemmy.world..?
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 days ago

    how about one of the original creators of wikipedia no longer using his own software and encouraging everyone to also not use it? he claims that the cia have been using it as a tool of information warfare since 2007

    I will admit that for shallow questions like ‘did this thing happen in this year’? wikipedia can sometimes be more useful than a plain search engine, also sometimes from wikipedia you can find links to real sources which can also be useful.






  • the minimum would be transparency for the algorithm. If users can see exactly what a social media algorithm is doing with their content feed, they would always have a way to identify and escape dark patterns of addiction.

    But this minimum itself would require powers to compel tech companies to give up what they would describe as intellectual property. Which would probably require a digital bill of rights?

    The most practical option would be to just ask your kids directly about the kinds of content they’ve been consuming and why. Dinner table conversations can probably reveal those dark patterns just as well


  • the code of conduct here is a disaster, and i’m sure it turns away free speech enthusiasts, as well as otherwise apolitical people trying to escape woke culture.

    It is not and should not be your responsibility to not cause offense.

    Anyone can be offended by anything, and by prioritising the feelings of whoever claims offense over the free speech rights of the ‘offender’ you risk these claims being made spuriously to weaken and fragment the organisation. This is how other foss orgs have been infiltrated and compromised, and it’s concerning to see the same foundation laid here.

    In that sense this place does feel like reddit, with their onerous and politicised moderation which promotoes an ideological race to the bottom, where only the most hegemonic and milquetoast opinions are permitted. Decentralisation and unmoderated freedom of speech should go hand in hand but the culture has shifted far away from that, and it’s no accident.