Both host content that are against our content policy and have had issues with users from those sites entering our community crossposting content that violates our content policy. We are discussing defederating other instances as well. There is discussion of lemmit.online being defederated because it pretty much exclusively scrapes reddit content and reposts it, and some content creators have expressed discomfort. If there’s other instances that might be worth considering defederating from, just post and it’ll be added to the current discussion.
and before anyone brings it up, lemmygrad defederated with us.
This isn’t a dictatorship but I ask that you please behave in the comment section and at least try to understand why we are defederating.
Is auth short for authoritarian or authentic?
Authoritarian, as in I believe a strong state is important to facilitate the transition to communism and safeguard against imperialist and capitalist interest.
Once the dialect is complete and communism has been achieved, that authoritarianism can be revisited, but that’s another conversation.
I know we’re all here to rub our peens but I’m curious about something:
So in this scenario, communism is achieved through authoritarian means. Now it’s time to revisit the authoritarian part. How do you get the auths out peacefully? From my experience with auths they don’t willingly give up power. What do?
Not trying to poke any holes in anyone’s ideology or beliefs. Am just curious :)
That’s the secret - you don’t!
Nobody gives up power willingly, with very few exceptions. I would say that is not auth specific.(Ironically Stalin tried to step down multiple times, we can debate the authetisity of those times elsewhere.)
From a purely materialist pov, once we reach sustainable communism, the state is no longer required to manage material division. At that point, to be honest, I don’t know. I would like to think that a state without purpose would simple wither, but I think we all know that is highly idealistic. So I’m going to cop out and say let’s focus on getting there first.
I’m an optimist at heart. ( Think Che’s quote on a revolutionary love) And I would want to believe that no one wants power if there is no reason material reason to pursue it. I also understand that is grossly naive and unrealistic. So how do we handle it… Man that’s a hell of a question huh? If you find a good answer, let me know?
Che’s quote I mentioned with context: https://www.quotescosmos.com/quotes/Che-Guevara-quote-23.html
Something to think about after post nut clarity! Thank you for your explanation and humouring my question :)
Maaaaaaaan let’s not do this here. They’re are plenty of places online to have this debate over and over again forever.
Wasn’t looking to debate, just wanted to expand my understanding of different viewpoints
Respectfully, what would your preferred approach to religious practice be from the standpoint of the state? Permitted, banned, something more nuanced? Particularly concerning paganism. I have never heard an authcom’s position on this matter.
I think so long as it remains divorced from the material reality of a society, then do what you will. I personally agree with Marx that religion is a balm for societal wounds that would be better healed by fixing the material reality that created those wounds in the first place. Materially stable people are better emotionally equipped to handle the realities of existence without looking for dogmatic excuses for the world around them… I apologize if the latter half of that came off more harsh than I intended.