• Socsa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    My experience with hexbear has been pretty fucking far from them knowing political theory, outside of one very specific niche they can kind of articulate as long as you don’t ask them to reduce any of it to fundamentals or first principles.

    As far as I can tell, their one trick is quoting books they haven’t actually read, assuming nobody else has read them either. I’ve literally had this same interaction three or four times at this point, over books which don’t say the things they think they say. Like multiple people arguing that some Chomsky work supports their orthodox ML theory.

    You can literally get them to argue against the works they are trying cite by quoting them. It’s amusing for a bit, but then it’s just sad.

    • DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Hexbear and Lemmygrad are different instances, but tbh at this point I’m just happy with people that can at least vaguely define liberalism and socialism, and I don’t have to see the great minds upvote “communism is right wing, AKSHUALLY, because right wing means authoritarian.”

      Edit: ah wait, your comment was under one about both, I conflated it with the other chain about Lemmygrad specifically.