Can anyone explain the revisionist thing for a non american who’s not familiar with revisionism in socialist parties?

My favorite Yes song is the intro to the game Solstice by Tim Follin. (It’s not a real Yes song).

Just like fibers, which it might count as (not sure)

There’s a few religious people on the website, I don’t know why you would imagine anything specific.

There are still fundamental truths about dogmas that can be found. If we are going to imagine here, as a non-muslim baby leftist, I can’t imagine peaceful fascist ideologies, while I can imagine non homophobic Islam.

The question of what something is, unless specified otherwise, always includes was and will be. Even if you could demonstrate that Islam is currently homophobic, (and I don’t think you were that specific in your original statement) as a whole it seems to be an unjust representation. Doubly so because it’s a faith, and voluntarily or not ends up being a proxy for the individuals that hold it.

Ok you win, I’m never bad posting again

So the material conditions of being a palestinian just happen to exist here but Islam is the more probable cause for that situation?

The funny thing is many are made from cellulose, which is edible. It’s not food grade so you’re still taking a big chance with whatever chemicals or bacteria though.

What else!?!

Just wow. I know that movie and couldn’t guess it right. Majestic

Nice, thanks I remember her from T2. Btw still haven’t guessed those 2 at the top

This one is hard, congrats

Can I get hints for Slap, Master and Space?

The best being Kantō Region Translation

Does this work?

This proof is partial though. This assumes there is only 1 way of obtaining lead. What if lead appeared from fusion in stars younger than that.

I think the content on hexbear is interesting and it’s bad to alienate new users of what they might find there. I reread the whole instance and the issues are being conflated in the comments here, I just don’t see what is being described here. Sure the bickering gets harsh deep in the comments, but that’s just the internet. People explain themselves sufficently well. That’s it.

C’est pour discuter honnêtement ou juste pour répéter qu’on lit la situation de façon opposé? J’ai pas trop envie, je voulais juste dire qu’on semble pas voir la même réalité. Les gens sont rapides à ignorer la vision de l’autre.

The whole mental health angle is reaching a bit far, but if anyone actually invokes it, I wouldn’t fight back. Like sure, you don’t want comment clashes, I can understand, I won’t trigger them.

I just have a problem with considering the whole hexbear instance as toxic and ideologically dubious. I get why someone might feel like that, but seeing 5 top level comments repeating it when I just don’t believe it’s true, I felt like adding my grain of salt.

We sit at the same table to try and bring the left together. I don’t care about helping Hexbear, I just wanna interest random users to challenge their views like I do. I have to work at standing up to others, true, but I haven’t encountered slurs, calls to violence or troll behavior from Hexbear, at least none that haven’t been resolved properly (though I’m sure it can happen).

Sometimes you express a view that’s untrue or that lacks empathy and get called out for it. It feels insulting when it happens, but I doesn’t have to be.

I’m not “my colleagues” and I don’t speak for them. If replying a simple “lol” to something of substance feels wrong, you could avoid doing it. My experience there makes me believe the lol user must have responded to something useless or disconnected from reality.

Yes thank you, makes sense