this post was submitted on 06 Dec 2023
128 points (100.0% liked)

the_dunk_tank

15994 readers
4 users here now

It's the dunk tank.

This is where you come to post big-brained hot takes by chuds, libs, or even fellow leftists, and tear them to itty-bitty pieces with precision dunkstrikes.

Rule 1: All posts must include links to the subject matter, and no identifying information should be redacted.

Rule 2: If your source is a reactionary website, please use archive.is instead of linking directly.

Rule 3: No sectarianism.

Rule 4: TERF/SWERFs Not Welcome

Rule 5: No ableism of any kind (that includes stuff like libt*rd)

Rule 6: Do not post fellow hexbears.

Rule 7: Do not individually target other instances' admins or moderators.

Rule 8: The subject of a post cannot be low hanging fruit, that is comments/posts made by a private person that have low amount of upvotes/likes/views. Comments/Posts made on other instances that are accessible from hexbear are an exception to this. Posts that do not meet this requirement can be posted to !shitreactionariessay@lemmygrad.ml

Rule 9: if you post ironic rage bait im going to make a personal visit to your house to make sure you never make this mistake again

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
KiaKaha@hexbear.net
MiraculousMM@hexbear.net
corgiwithalaptop@hexbear.net
VILenin@hexbear.net
replaceable@hexbear.net
EmmaGoldman@hexbear.net
CARCOSA@hexbear.net
128
"Commies when they actually read a book about Cuban history." (lemmygrad.ml)
submitted 2 years ago by VictimOfAmerikkka@lemmygrad.ml to c/the_dunk_tank@hexbear.net
66 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 420blazeit69@hexbear.net 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

they will reply.

Sure, you're always going to get some lib disagreeing with you. You're not going to convince some lib reply guy, but you might convince some skeptical person reading along. And lurkers far outnumber posters.

Here's how these conversations play out for that skeptical person:

Leftist: Castro freed slaves.

Lib: Cuba freed its slaves in 1886, you don't know Basic History.

Skeptical person: [Googles "when did Cuba free its slaves," finds 1886, disregards leftist and whatever else they argue.]

Or,

Leftist: Even the guy who invaded Cuba said Bautista was a monster and the Revolution was a popular uprising, here's a link.

Lib: That was before the firing squads.

Leftist: Shooting the enforcers of a monstrous dictator is good, actually.

Skeptical person: [Clicks on link, "huh Kennedy really did say that, I guess Bautista really was that bad" keeps listening.]

[–] combat_brandonism@hexbear.net 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

look if we're going to apply the uncharitable jump to conclusion you're doing in the first you've gotta apply it to the second

Here's how these conversations play out for that skeptical person:

Leftist: Castro freed slaves.

Lib: Cuba freed its slaves in 1886, you don't know Basic History.

Skeptical person: [Googles "when did Cuba free its slaves," finds 1886, disregards leftist and whatever else they argue.]

Or,

Leftist: Even the guy who invaded Cuba said Bautista was a monster and the Revolution was a popular uprising, here's a link.

Lib: That was before the firing squads.

Skeptical person: [Doesn't google shit. "Yeah JFK wanted to give them a chance but that awful dictator was too evil!"]

[–] 420blazeit69@hexbear.net 1 points 2 years ago

I'm suggesting a skeptical person will do some minimal amount of checking on a claim they don't immediately believe. When they see someone say Cuba had slaves in 1959, they'll google it. When they see someone provide a link to a speech and summarize it, they'll skim the link.