• GlueBear [they/them] @lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    “oh no the Myanmar junta is anti-American, that’s why we should support them in their bloody civil war”.

    Isn’t critical support exactly for this purpose? People support Hezbollah for their stance on the colonization and genocide of Palestine, but not necessarily all of their other takes on lgbt people. Or what about Assad and his beliefs that gay couple shouldn’t be allowed to adopt children for entirely reactionary reasons?

    I’m sure people on hexbear don’t support those ideas in the slightest and only support the organization insofar as it pertains to Palestine. Hence critical support as opposed to uncritical support.

    • ButtBidet [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      I’ve never heard a leftist, much less an ML, use “critical support” to justify allying with fascists. Maybe you can enlighten me. Honestly, I swear to God I’m not being snarky now, I’d like to know. As for Hezbollah, they’re still a liberation anti-colonial movement. I don’t think many MLs actually support Assad, most seem to oppose Western fuckery with Syria. I guess if Berletic fighting in Gaza, I might “critically support” him.

      The Hexbear news comm has a “no reactionary source” rule. I guess we can’t all be the same, but reactionary sources are problematic in that 1) they send clinks and views to a fascist, and 2) when the fascists says something on the boundary, there’s yet another pointless battle about the truth of said POV. I guess we shouldn’t care what liberals think, but I imagine that posting a reactionary that shares our views on Ukraine makes non MLs think we’ve lost the plot.