commiewolf

Damn, you are a Turk, as well a dear American? Hasan?

It seems quite disappointing that whenever I see pictures of these big marches in India with loads of red banners etc. It's usually older adults and elderly. I've yet to see such action with a sizeable portion of the youth taking part, and that should be concerning. If the older generation is more radical than the youth, the already fascist and insane Indian society really has no hope left.

I get what you mean. Perspective makes it hard sometimes to not compare the third world experience to the grievances of those in the imperial core and not feel a sense of resentment. However, at the end of the day I don't wish hardship on you or anyone.

I will admit I got a quite upset seeing your initial comment due to my own personal experience, and I apologize for coming across so hostile.

But I will maintain that, while your concerns are not unjustified, should you be deported, you will be at worst an annoying car ride/train journey away from seeing your friends again. As well as those places and things you have grown attached to over the years you've been an immigrant, and even your work, as due to the Schengen zone, you could even still do the same job and commute between the countries. And at worst, should you be totally banned from entering for whatever reason, your friends can still take that short ride over and see you.

For many deported people, like myself, especially those sent back to the global south, we are left economically crippled and have to start over with almost nothing, knowing that we will likely NEVER return to the life, people, and everything else we were made to leave behind.

Even thinking about it today, years later, makes me so irrationally upset and depressed, knowing I'll likely never return and see my friends again, due to both the sheer distance, and the sheer economic unlikelihood of such a thing. I guess seeing these kinds of "first world" worries makes me feel a rage at the sheer injustice that I am subjected to, just because of where I happened to be born.

Mate.. you would be deported from Belgium to the Netherlands... thats absolutely nothing. Take it from someone who's actually been deported, you will never know the half of it.

And Al-Jazeera pretends to be pro Palestine while they're just a state propaganda mouthpiece who's main goal is to get Sunni Muslims to believe everything they say about regimes that "Oppress the true faith".

As much as I would like to see it, I don't report posts from them that don't add "Sectarian Reactionary News Media" added in the title. Because unlike the new york times, there are a lot of outlets who, due to their coverage of the genocide, have lulled many people into thinking they are upstanding and should be listened to. Another example for this is just recently we saw middle east spectator reveal themselves to be Anti-LGBT when they commented on Zohran Mamdani's position on pride. Do we now ignore, report, and block every single thing they report on?

It's not the fault of the user who posts it, neither does it break a rule. I take no issue with your discomfort at CPGB being reactionary, I believe so too.

However it is not against the rules (as they are currently, I do think they could be improved) to post something they say, as long as it is not directly endorsing the party or it's reactionary views. I don't see that here.

I recall that this user has in the past made some pretty unhinged comments which suggest mental illness, I worry for their wellbeing.

I think the race brainworms have set in, my dear American friend.

I could say all those things about the BBC, the Guardian, etc

That is the point, you definitely can, and if we followed the rules the way you did, we'd be reporting every post made out of one of their pieces, that's my point. We do not post anything with the assumption that we are uncritically endorsing everything that has ever been said by the source. And if we do so for some and not others, we give legitimacy to the ones we don't try and ban from our discussions. If this is the intended way we follow these rules, I am much more uncomfortable with Al-Jazeera, Middle East eye, New York times and their ilk being seen as totally fair and productive to post articles from than whoever this small UK party member is.

I’m not sure why you want to report Al Jazeera, there is no rule against posting from mainstream media.

They are a sectarian, anti China, anti Shia propaganda rag that manufactured consent for the destruction of Syria and Libya, yet I see plenty of posts of their articles here, particularly about Palestine, and yet I tolerate it and don't report people for making such posts, because I don't automatically assume the people posting are trying to promote sectarian, anti China views.

Also how do you interpret the rule, do you take it as meaning "We don't want people with such views to be a part of this community and spread their views" or "We don't want people with such views to even be mentioned in this community regardless of why"?

Should we go and report any post from Al-Jazeera? Or any post that links to western state propaganda in general? Does that count as breaking the "Promoting anti-communism" rule? I think it's a little much to go about reporting people for linking something somebody said, just because we don't like the somebody who said it. I don't see any explicit all encompassing endorsement of this person's reactionary views anywhere in this post.

Germany should have been completely disintegrated after WWII. I think the Soviets made a mistake by creating the DDR, because at the end of the day it was still possible to re-unite and create what has effectively become the fourth Reich. Should have been split into like 5 different independent PRs/annexed by Poland/Czechoslovakia.