127
rule (lemmygrad.ml)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/chapotraphouse@hexbear.net
121 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Just reposting this excellent point from lemmygrad

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 17 points 3 years ago (2 children)

I think stuff like pit is fine because 1. It's a Nazi and 2. It's not a real person. I think barbara-pit is fine because it was a bunch of partisans getting retribution during wartime. They had no time or resources for a fair trial and they knew the people they executed anyway, so the evidence was pretty clear.

I think the reason that image crosses my line is because it depicts a traumatic event that happened to actual people, and some of those people didn't really have the agency to do anything else. I'm not sad the Romanovs are dead, and I think the overthrow and owning of a doofus failson named Nicky is something that should be celebrated, but I just don't think that justifies mocking people in their last moments. Had things been different then some of them might've gotten the Puyi treatment, it's sad that that wasn't possible. I'm not losing any sleep over it - they are caviar as their people were starving and dying at the front - but that doesn't mean I think it should be turned into an object of ridicule.

It reeks of aesthetic communism. Like some chuds support the USSR because they think the holodomor was real and they think it was a good thing. They just like cool mosin nagant, human wave death machine, lol kill people. That's what that image reeks of.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago* (last edited 3 years ago) (1 child)

    Aesthetic communism is when you support the actual, real life actions of an actual, real life revolution.

    I think stuff like pit is fine because 1. It's a Nazi and 2. It's not a real person.

    I know a bunch of dead Nazis in a pit that would disagree with that second statement.

    I think barbara-pit is fine because it was a bunch of partisans getting retribution during wartime.

    Sounds very similar to Russia in 1918

    Maybe it’s a response to the 100 years of liberals sobbing their hearts out for a murdering pogroming failson and his murdering pogroming family.

    But no, I just like killing people. That’s it.

    I don’t want to be hostile but I’ve got years of disingenuous libs grinding my patience down

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    Comrade, no reason to interpret this in the worst possible way. This wasn't meant as an insult to you or an attack on you.
    Reducing this to me saying "the soviets were bad, their revolution was bad" is incredibly bad faith, or at the least incredibly reductive.
    I'm sorry I've made you feel as though I think you think killing is good. It was not my intention, though I struggle to see how I created that experience

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    I guess it’s because that’s usually implied whenever a critique of the Romanov execution.

    And I don’t mean to imply that you’re against the Soviets, I just find calling the execution “aesthetic communism” anathema.

    I think talking about “killing” in a vacuum is meaningless. I’m sure most people would be against it in the abstract, but I think killing monarchs in a revolution is a justifiable action. I don’t feel insulted by anyone saying I support the Romanov execution, because that would be true, but by the implication that I support killing for the sake of it. It’s hard not to read that into the last paragraph of the comment I replied to. I certainly don’t think it takes bad faith to interpret it that way.

    With the whole federation thing, it’s really hard to tell between genuine criticisms and liberals concern trolling. I’m sorry for the initial reaction.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 3 years ago* (1 child)

    And I don’t mean to imply that you’re against the Soviets, I just find calling the execution “aesthetic communism” anathema.

    I don't think the execution was aesthetic communism.
    I dislike the picture you posted, and I tried to put into words why I felt it crossed my line. One of the reasons for that was that it gave me the vibe of being something an aesthetic communist would like - I don't know if you've ever met the type, but they're kinda weird. They're stalinists because of western propaganda, not in spite of it. I can see how my phrasing made it seem like I was accusing you of being such a type, and that was not my intent. I'm sorry.

    I think talking about “killing” in a vacuum is meaningless. I’m sure most people would be against it in the abstract, but I think killing monarchs in a revolution is a justifiable action. I don’t feel insulted by anyone saying I support the Romanov execution, because that would be true, but by the implication that I support killing for the sake of it. It’s hard not to read that into the last paragraph of the comment I replied to.

    I agree on the first part, I'm sorry about the second part.

    With the whole federation thing, it’s really hard to tell between genuine criticisms and liberals concern trolling. I’m sorry for the initial reaction

    I get it, though I also experienced this before federation (new account now, who dis?) and saw it happen as well. Wether it's wreckers or libs, we end up being on edge, and then this happens. It's regrettable but it is what it is. Thanks for your apology about your initial reaction.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •