Skip Navigation
Ye Power Trippin' Bastards @lemmy.dbzer0.com
Keeponstalin @lemmy.world

Banned for criticism of US foreign policy on Ukraine

Which mods/admins were being Power Tripping Bastards?

@PugJesus

What sanction did they impose (e.g. community ban, instance ban, removed comment)?

Community ban, comments wiped from modlog

Provide a screenshot of the relevant modlog entry (don’t de-obfuscate mod names).

Provide a screenshot and explanation of the cause of the sanction (e.g. the post/comment that was removed, or got you banned).

Unable to find comments in modlog

Explain why you think its unfair and how you would like the situation to be remedied.

I was community banned after the mod falsely smeared me as doing genocide apologia. Not just me but also the hosts of the Blowback podcast Brendan James and Noah Kulwin, as well as Noam Chomsky. According to PugJesus, we are all actually pro genocide.

Context:

In this post about the victims of the Iraq War, I shared Season 1 of the Blowback podcast as it does a phenomenal job covering the war and aftermath while humanizing the victims. PugJesus falsely smeared them as "campist cretins" to discredit the entire podcast. I pushed back.

PugJesus brought up a previous discussion where they also tried to discredit the Journalists and Podcast based on tweets. Here, as with the more recent post, pushed back.

The tweets in question:

According to PugJesus, this is evidence that Brendan James and Noah Kulwin are pro Russia and pro Ukrainian genocide. I completely disagree.

To clarify my position. I have always maintained the position that Ukraine is fighting a war of self defense and fighting for their sovereignty. I have always maintained that Putin's war is illegal and unjustifiable; and that what Russia should do to pull out completely and enact reparations. I have always maintained that I am in complete support of supplying arms to Ukraine, same as any other people fighting against Imperialism and/or Colonialism. I also consider Putin's invasion justifies the need of a European security pact, although I'd prefer it to be one without the US. And yes, Putin's war is a genocide, as multiple genocide scholars have expressed.

I do not consider the US to be a benevolent and altruistic actor. Instead I consider the US to not have the best interests of Ukraine at heart; using the opportunity to expand NATO for the benefit of US Hegemony and to extract capital out of Ukraine. I believe those are worth criticizing and not remotely "genocide apologia"

The two contentious points are as follows

Has the US escalated the conflict to further its own foreign policy goals? Or is saying so genocide apologia?

From the evidence I have seen, yes the US has escalated the conflict. That does not mean Ukraine is to blame, which they aren't. Nor does it mean Russia hasn't escalated the situation more than the US has, which is an easy argument to make and has merit. All it means is that there are actions by the US worth criticizing as they at the expense of Ukraine.

Sources:

Has the US used the conflict to exploit Ukraine financially? Or is saying so genocide apologia?

I think the US has certainly exploited Ukraine, in particular with the usual neoliberal model of loans and privatization via the IMF and World Bank. This is a criticism of the US and of Neoliberal economics, not of Ukraine who's facing an existential threat.

Sources:

Of course both these criticisms are peanuts when it comes to Trump's complete alignment with Putin's foreign policy aims.

I'm no expert on Russia/Ukraine, if anyone has sources I've overlooked please share. My main concern is the discrediting of Blowback and the Journalists who host it, who have done phenomenally detailed and sourced work on the Iraq War, Cuba, Korea, Afghanistan, and Cambodia. Likening them to "pro-genocide" is disingenuous at best and discrediting their work on that is an injustice.

62 comments

  • YTB.

    You are promoting russian propaganda about NATO expansion as a justification for the invasion. This is a key element of their overall propaganda. Ukraine was neutral before the beginning of the russian invasion in 2014.

    You are also essentially supporting the notion that russia's former colonies do not have the right to self-determination.

    There is a reason that the Baltic nations and former Warsaw pact countries immediately tried to join NATO as soon as possible, because unlike you, they understand what the russians are like (going into details is out of scope for this post, but in short, decades of sociological research using a wide variety of methodologies, including ones to estimate the impact of preference falsification, show a consistent strong majority support for genocidal imperialism among the russian public).

    I will also point out that russian occupation is happening in countries that were not able to join NATO (Moldova, Georgia, Ukraine).

    Your attitude is indeed campist. The stuff you say about "neoliberal this and that" and "IMF" is comical in context of Ukraine's economic development.

    Can you outline your argument in a clear and specific manner in your own words? This should be simple if you aren't merely repeating copytext.

    The Brendon James quote is definitely pro-russian and de facto serves as justification for the russian invasion.

    Kulwin also engages in pretty typical whataboutism style justification of russian actions. EDIT: Kulwin is associated with "Chapo Trap House".

    Did the US annex Basra, steal tens of thousands of Iraqi children and send them to re-education camps were they would be forced to write letters to US military forces involved in the annexation of Basra? Did they ban Islam and and allow only US Christian churches in the newly annexed Basra? Did they ban Arabic and send anyone caught speaking Arabic into a network of torture camps? Did the Americans systematically use castration and torture against captured Iraqi soldiers trying to stop the annexation of Basra?

    Do Kulwin or James speak russian or Ukrainian? Have they ever lived in russia or Ukraine?

    All I am seeing is pretty lazy repetition of russian propaganda copytext. The type that is widely used by russians as justification for all their actions.

    It's fair to not tolerate propaganda in a community, even if a user genuinely believes it or claims to be acting in good faith (which may not be true).

    A username such as "Keeponstalin" is also an immediate red flag.

    • Also, claiming anyone but Russia is guilty for "escalating the conflict" that Russia starter and is continuing and where Russia engages in genocide is, indeed, genocide apologetics.

      • And yes, Putin’s war is a genocide, as multiple genocide scholars have expressed.

        How is the user apologizing for genocide with this clear comment?

      • You keep using this word, but I don't think you know what it means. One can be In total support of Ukraine and clearly judge Russia for starting a war and breaking international law while still not be blind to history!

        If one wants peace one needs to understand geopoltics and imperialism.

        Sure its not OK by moral standards that Russia wants to influence sovereign states for their military interest. Sadly the world doesn't (yet) work by moral standards or international law.

        One can criticize the imperialistic war of Russia, but one can also criticize the imperialistic economic and hegemonial control the US seeks over the region, those things don't contradict each other.

        We have one facist and one nearly facist state fighting over their imperialistic interest, neither of them is doing it because of ethics or international law.

        We Europeans are the victims in this coflict of two imperialistic super powers, and even if one is worse then the other, both are far from perfect or even bothered in things other than their own interest and what they can gain and both can be criticized. this does not negate that one is using far worse means to achieve their special interests atm.

    • I have always maintained the position that Ukraine is fighting a war of self defense and fighting for their sovereignty. I have always maintained that Putin’s war is illegal and unjustifiable; and that what Russia should do to pull out completely and enact reparations. I have always maintained that I am in complete support of supplying arms to Ukraine, same as any other people fighting against Imperialism and/or Colonialism. I also consider Putin’s invasion justifies the need of a European security pact, although I’d prefer it to be one without the US. And yes, Putin’s war is a genocide, as multiple genocide scholars have expressed.

      The user does exactly what you asked the user to do??

      • I have always maintained the position that Ukraine is fighting a war of self defense and fighting for their sovereignty. I have always maintained that Putin’s war is illegal and unjustifiable; and that what Russia should do to pull out completely and enact reparations. I have always maintained that I am in complete support of supplying arms to Ukraine, same as any other people fighting against Imperialism and/or Colonialism. I also consider Putin’s invasion justifies the need of a European security pact, although I’d prefer it to be one without the US. And yes, Putin’s war is a genocide, as multiple genocide scholars have expressed.

        OP claims to support Ukrainian sovereignty, but at the same time believes that Ukrainian foreign policy should be subject to a russian veto under the auspices of "no NATO expansion".

    • From my understanding Russia justifies the invasion by claiming NATO expansion as a major threat. That's the complete opposite of my position. Whether NATO expansion is a threat or not, it absolutely doesn't justify the invasion. If it is a threat, that necessitates Russia to negotiate not start an illegal invasion. The invasion only proves the need for a Western Europe security pact

      Neo-colonialism has crippled and robbed practically every country in the global south, I consider it bad for it to be implemented onto any country, Ukraine included.

      My argument boils down to Imperialism bad, Neo-colonialism bad

      • That's not what you said in your OP. You were pretty clear in your embrace of "NATO expansion" a bring the root cause of the russian invasion of Ukraine and you also openly tried to shift the blame on the US, when the only party at blame are the russians.

        Instead I consider the US to not have the best interests of Ukraine at heart; using the opportunity to expand NATO for the benefit of US Hegemony and to extract capital out of Ukraine.

        Here you state that NATO expansion forced the russian to invade. You don't say it explicitly, but I am not stupid. And this pretty standard for Western "leftist" polemics.

        From the evidence I have seen, yes the US has escalated the conflict. That does not mean Ukraine is to blame, which they aren’t. Nor does it mean Russia hasn’t escalated the situation more than the US has, which is an easy argument to make and has merit.

        Here you are justifying the russian invasion by claiming that the actions of the US forced them to invade. There is only one party to blame for the invasion of Ukraine and that's the russians.

        Keep in mind that most western-based pro-russian narratives typically being with "I think the invasion is bad, but...". This is not a novel rhetorical device and it's widely used by supporters of russian genocidal imperialism in the west.

      • Russia offered to negotiate, and seek security guarantees. Biden and nato are very proud to have never talked to russia, and having colonized sweden and Finland.

  • Looks more like you want. !unlockthread@lemm.ee

    That being said, you can usually get to deleted comments by trying to edit them, or via screen shots of your own comment history on some apps. It makes it harder to say anything useful without the actual comment.

    But, yeah, this posts looks more like rehashing the argument rather than looking for feedback about the mod action. As usual, it may be necessary to say that I'm not going to get into the argument. At this point, I'm about ready to just block anyone that tries to keep pounding their pulpit at me here when the whole point is about the mod actions themselves, not the validity of any arguments involved.

    With that caveat, let's break it down.

    We have no images or references to your comment, so everything here is bases purely on what is visible in the links provided.

    In those links, it was made pretty clear what the mod's stance was. So some mod action was justified. If a mod keeps telling you that what you're doing is something that isn't allowed on their community, and you keep doing it, that's on you

    However, a full on permaban is a very steep response when not coupled with a direct warning of "stfu or else" of some kind, and I didn't catch anything like that in the links provided. But, I am dyslexic, so I do sometimes miss things, and even when that isn't a factor, those threads were long enough it would be easy to miss a warning.

    So, unless I missed that warning and/or the comment that was removed was way worse than anything else you said, there's some degree of PTB here. I'd say a mid level degree of it, based on the criteria already listed. If it had been a temp ban of reasonable length, that's only rarely going to be PTB because it's a combined warning and cooldown time, which is a valid mod action for most things.

    But, being real, it looks like y'all had a long disagreement, and you're here more to keep at it. When disagreements get that long, I'm never surprised when someone power trips or over reacts. If I could see the removed comment, I might urge pug to change it to a temp ban, but you may well have flipped a table there, so I dunno. If that comment was no worse than any of the others in the links, yeah, might be good to consider a change in action, roll it back a little.

    Also important to note I'm basing that off of only the linked threads. There may be other history between the two of you, or just you as a user, that merits the more drastic action

    • However, a full on permaban is a very steep response when not coupled with a direct warning of “stfu or else” of some kind, and I didn’t catch anything like that in the links provided.

      I tend towards permabans for disinformation, genocide apologia, and the like. People don't "cool down" out of genocide apologia or disinformation, so I see no reason to use temp bans for such things.

      I'm not here to play games with people who think that Ukraine's sovereignty and the lives of Ukrainians are a matter of debate, especially not when I've had the exact argument with them on the same subject elsewhere before (as linked in my comments in the thread).

      • Like I said, not getting into the subject matter.

        My goal in this community is to try and keep things as limited as possible to a loose standard.

        That standard holds no acceptance for bigotry. Beyond that, it's about whether or not mod decisions are scaled to the offence.

        It's your bailiwick, you make the calls. I'm basing my opinion here on what's visible via the post itself, any relevant user history, mod logs and general mod etiquette. Again loose standards, but that's how I parse these things to minimize my own bias.

        It's impossible to entirely dump bias, though I'm at least average at doing so on most things. But the more I let myself be swayed by subject matter that is controversial, the less the process matters for me. Like, what's the point of me even coming here and wasting people's time if I'm just going to bandwagon on the external subject? It would be douchebaggery for me to do that.

        For my part, I support the use of preemptive bans as a mod tool. I have opinions about how and when they are or aren't power tripping, but as a tool, they're valuable.

        I stand by my reasoning of why this specific mod action was mid level PTB. Not egregious, but above the threshold of there being no overreach.

        Since you are kinda asking, what I would have done first is warn them to stay away from any C/s I mod with the bullshit, or they'd catch a ban faster than a Ukrainian drone up Putin's ass, and done exactly that if they showed. Then, when they fucked around, finding out would be an expected outcome because there wouldn't be any doubt.

        Or, a preemptive ban if I suspected them likely enough to fuck around no matter what the warning was.

        But, again, I can't see the removed comment in the post itself, and couldn't when I wrote the comment. So there's wiggle room in all that. So could any un-linked conversation, or sections that were linked and I missed.

        Repeating again, it doesn't matter if I agree or disagree with you, or op. As it happens, I agree with you on the Ukraine issue. But that shouldn't matter for this community, or I might as well just fuck off.

    • moderators have the "remove content" option when issuing a community ban that removes the entries from the modlog and prevents users from accessing their comments in the way you mention. The moderator PugJesus used that function here on KeepOnStalin

  • According to PugJesus, this is evidence that Brendan James and Noah Kulwin are pro Russia and pro Ukrainian genocide. I completely disagree.

    Brendan James: "Even with the Ukraine invasion recently under its belt, russia is a less war hungry country than our own".

    Noah Kulwin: "I don't think America should bankroll it into perpetuity".

    Both of those statements are arguing to either discourage aid to Ukraine, or belittle the impact of the actually ongoing violence the Ukrainians are enduring. They are exhibiting classic behaviours intended to shift the line towards Russian support. Hiding behind 'technically we overtly said "russia bad"' while arguing 'but not THAT bad' is BS plain and simple.

    YDI.

    • Brendan James: "Even with the Ukraine invasion recently under its belt, russia is a less war hungry country than our own".

      If the scope is the entire foreign policy, wars and regime changes across South America, Asia, and the Middle East, the US has much larger appetite for war. Not that Russia has any less of a desire for Imperialism, the US just have a greater means with the largest military and bases worldwide. If the context is of only Ukraine, I totally agree with you.

      Noah Kulwin: "I don't think America should bankroll it into perpetuity".

      From what I understand Military and Humanitarian Aid does not bankroll a country. Ukraine doesn't have to pay the US back for the aid, nor should they. Neo-colonialist loans that privatize public companies would bankroll a country, as they have across the global south. If Noah is referring to aid, I agree with you, I think he's talking about the loans.

      I don't know the context of these tweets since I don't use twitter. Never in all the content of the Blowback podcast or their articles have I ever seen them discourage aid or minimize the violence of any party, neither state actors nor rebel insurgents. They make it a point to not minimize any violence whatsoever. That's the main reason I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt with these random tweets, because the interpretation that they are minimizing the violence of Russia in no way lines with the work they've done. The context of the tweets could very well prove me wrong for all I know

  • PTB not only did he ban you when he couldnt respond to your argument he used the remove comments feature to hide his power tripping

62 comments