So i never heard about citadel project before... From their Code of Conduct (or lack thereof):
Social Justice Warriors (SJWs) are prohibited from participating in the Citadel community.
Not that i identify with this SJW label, but my interpretation is they're pretty happy without most of us :)
"Tankism" from my understanding is an umbrella term for various forms of authoritarianism. Marxism-Leninism is definitely one of those, and so is trotskyism and maoism.
Marxism has strong overlap with "tankism" but the two groups are not equivalent, as there's a (growing?) number of anti-authoritarian marxists.
All those labels you quoted have actual meaning. They may not be always used accurately, but they are not derailed from reality. There's millions of nazis around spreading their ideology, as much as there's marxist-leninists trying to rewrite history of the bolshevik coup d'État and political repression as some form of popular justice. These people deserve to be criticized for their genocidal aspirations.
I prefer having this filter rather than not having it, mostly because of the systemic effects I explained.
That's also the case for me, in case that was not clear :)
I think some words are almost always meant to harm, and can be easily replace by more positive or neutral term.
I don't think it's that easy, because of the context. Should all usage of the n***** word by black people be prevented? Should all usage of w****/b**** words by queer/femmes folks in a sex-positive context be prevented? etc.. I agree with you using these words is most times inappropriate and we can find better words for that, however white male technologists have a long history of dictating how the software can be used (and who it's for) and i believe there's something wrong in that power dynamic in and of itself. It's not uncommon that measures of control introduced "to protect the oppressed" turn into serious popular repression.
Still, like i said i like this filter in practice, and it's part of the reason i'm here (no fascism policy). As a militant antifascist AFK, i need to reflect on this and ponder whether automatic censorship is ok in the name of antifascism: it seems pretty efficient so far, if only as a psychological barrier. And i strongly believe we should moderate speech and advertise why we consider certain words/concepts to be mental barriers, but i'm really bothered on an ethical level to just dismiss content without human interaction. Isn't that precisely what we critique in Youtube/Facebook/etc? I'm not exactly placing these examples on the same level as a slur filter though ;)
The devs explain here a clear intention to make this change difficult enough to prevent at least partially the migration of some communities they don’t want to support and/or give a platform to.
I'm happy it's becoming harder for neonazis to find a home online, however i'm not happy that this makes lemmy english-centric, and i'm not happy that honest discussion about some topics (including thoughtful criticism) will be made harder.
Related example: on another message board a few weeks back i couldn't post a message containing my criticism of "bitcoin" because bitcoin was part of the slur filter to filter out the crypto-capitalist clique... i understand and appreciate why it was put in place, but i felt really powerless as a user that a machine who lacks understanding of the context of me using this word, decided i had no right to post it. I appreciate strong moderation, but i don't trust machine to police/judge our activities.
Well it depends what type of "communism" we're talking about. Fascism has usually a pretty clear understanding: repression of political dissent, emphasis on a national feeling and a sense of unique destiny to destroy/conquer whoever disagrees, various forms of eugenism (in the sense of killing people because they're homosexual or handicapped), the cult of work as a duty to your homeland, as in some cases also strong racism (to my knowledge this is not a feature of italian fascism, but rather other forms of nazism/fascism).
So now, what is communism? According to marxists and anarchists, communism is the stateless, peaceful, egalitarian society. However, marxists believe an intermediary step is required to reach communism: the dictatorship of the proletariat, which has led to countless deaths and suffering. So if "dictatorship of the proletariat" is your definition of communism, then i would almost agree with you "communism" is just as bad as "fascism". However, there still are some differences:
So no, it's not the same. And in any way, most people you will meet through life will talk about communism as the principle free and equal society. That is, the abolition of privileges (remember 1789?) and freedom and equality for all. In this anarchist understanding of communism, then really there's nothing wrong with communism.
Free association + Mutual aid + Solidarity against domination = <3 Short introduction to anarchism i wrote in another topic
He was making a good point. Huge multinationals often have departments with wildly different behaviors/policies. These departments are often in conflict with one another, or don't know so much about one another. I agree with you trusting anything remotely associated to Google is utterly stupid when it comes to privacy, but the argument exposed was not stupid.
It was in fact solid insider's advice, to know to exploit differences between branches of a given tentacular company in some circumstances. For example, Debian's cooperation with Lenovo for better hardware support is in fact a collaboration with a specific department within Lenovo, and has a lot of blocking points from other departments.
EDIT: Also another good point was that selfhosting services (eg. services just for "me") often leaks more metadata than using shared services which other folks connect to as well.