Huh? I don't see this as them saying 'idgaf about transphobia', they're just saying they think states are so unsustainable that such minorities can easily get hurt in their failure. Unless I'm misreading it, this is just "Anarchist says states are dangerously unworkable", which like.. yeah, that's kind of what anarchists say.

I would still say their assertions are wrong, but I don't see any dismissal of transphobia here.

[–] purpleworm@hexbear.net 16 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

They are justifying not some hypothetical anarchist revolt against the state, but the actual historical destruction of the GDR, gutting it and sacrificing it to its Nazi neighbor. Elsewhere in the thread there's a link to the OOP and they are clearly talking about the part with the famous article about how queer rights will be undermined by "reunification", to which you can clearly see in the comment that they are basically saying it's understandable that people would abandon the queer population if it's expedient in their noble quest of destroying the "dystopia".

Edit: I can already hear their "I'm not touching yoooouuu" style defense of their statement, that they actually were talking about a hypothetical anarchist revolt and not supporting East Germany's actual destruction, but then why are they talking about abandoning queer people to start with? Surely their hypothetical revolt knows intersectionality is important, and it's not like there weren't anarchist types fighting for queer rights there as they do everywhere. The idea that this isn't expressing sympathy for the historical destruction of East Germany is not supported by the text and if db0 truly intended otherwise (bullshit), they should take a break from posting and take a remedial writing class to understand the concept of salience.

[–] axont@hexbear.net 11 points 4 days ago

db0 is mischaracterizing the dissolution of eastern Germany in way that reads to me as transphobia, or at least could be seen as dismissing actual things trans people said. East Germany wasn't dissolved due to the choices of its population, it was crushed by nato encirclement and made to reunite with the nazi west. Queer east Germans at the time were worried about losing rights, but db0 is characterizing this as less meaningful than some broader dissatisfaction that east Germans had with their socialist state, which simply wasn't the case.

To me as an American it reminds me of how liberals would tell me I'm gonna end up in a camp for queer people if I don't vote for Kampala Harris. Like it's a pure dismissal of me and my political orientation in favor of fantasizing.

db0 is claiming it's perfectly reasonable that people would overthrow a socialist state while betraying queer people. Which is simply a foolish way of seeing the world, because what does that say of db0? Are they saying it's a more noble cause to overthrow a supposed police state dystopia in the name of anarchism than to worry about the consequences for minorities?