Autistici/Inventati is an Italian collective, active since around 2001, that runs free digital services for activists, grassroots groups and anyone who wants to communicate without being profiled.

It provides email accounts, mailing lists, blogs, websites, chat and VPN access.

Is it truly anyone, or only anyone that politically aligns with them?

Anyone that politically aligns with them. They say that explicitly:

> We support individuals, collectives, communities and groups whose political and social activities fit within this worldview and who share with us some fundamental principles: anti-fascism, anti-racism, anti-sexism, anti-militarism

They don't receive any money for this. It's 100% volunteer services.

Then they are an activist group, not an “infrastructure provider” as claimed elsewhere in this thread, and holding them responsible for what their members do with the accounts they give them seems entirely fair.

> fair

No, with these limited elements. The filter may just be "of course I will not provide my (free) service to people that may use it in what I call a repugnant way".

When you know Harry is a rogue CEO, say a misinformation spreader or the issuer of unethical products, and you refuse to work for it, to provide it your services: does that make you an "activist"? Many people will call it "just the normal right thing to do". This is similar to people here calling certain positions "centrist" or "extremist" - and that entirely depends on how those positions are interpreted beyond their dumb (not telling) label, and on the dumb labels over said labels.

> Many people will call it "just the normal right thing to do".

It’s absolutely not a normal thing to do for entities that want to use the “we are just infrastructure, our users are responsible for their actions” excuse.

In fact, such entities (e.g. power grid, telecom) are often legally prohibited from choosing their clients, and in exchange aren’t held responsible for what their clients do with their services.

You want them to be "held accountable" for supporting groups that don't align with the ideology of the US whitehouse.

If you select who you provide services to based on their ideology, you can’t shrug and say “I’m just an infrastructure provider, same as the electrical grid” when it turns out that some of those individuals committed crimes using the stuff you gave them.

That’s a very different situation compared to the standard “sign up with your email here”. The provider is responsible because they picked their clients, rather than their clients picking them.

Look, really not. When the bartender glances at the customer and decides whether they have already drank too much, if the bartender makes a mistake and the customer later crashes into something it is not the bartender's responsibility.

If the bartender decides as a rule "first of all, if they seem uncertain on their legs it is already a no", again that is just a codification of the former.

[deleted]

being selective about who you provide free services to makes you an activist group?

Yes, see, if you sell guns, but you only sell guns to people who promise to use them for defense, but don't sell them to people who promise to murder, that makes you an activist gun seller and personally responsible for whatever happens with those guns.

Either you wanted to be sarcastic or your simile did not work well.

Obviously not to fascists, and if you look at their website they make it very clear that you need to align ideologically and explain why and how you will use their services

[flagged]

Do the US then also sanction themselves? Cause the numer of people they have killed in that region of the globe since 1984 easily exceeds that number by orders of magnitude.

And the platform hasn't done any killing. They merely provide email etc. Are we going to sanction road builders too because a murderer has driven on their road since 1984?

The US sanctions the PKK because we're obliged to do so by our NATO ally Turkey, which gave rise to the PKK by carrying out a genocide against its local Kurdish population.

Meanwhile the SDF, the armed wing of the PYD, follows the same ideology as the PKK and was trained in military tactics by the PKK, and was among our chief allies against ISIS. They fought alongside US soldiers and we even supplied them with small arms.

The history of the PKK is complicated and the state they struggle against has a long history of genocide and (more recently) outright dictatorship. The relation of these countries to the PKK isn't ultimately determined by the PKK's history, morality, ideology, or even the use of terrorist tactics per se.

If you're curious about the bigger picture, there's actually an organized movement whose aim is to "de-list the PKK" as a terrorist organization, and that's probably a good place to start: https://www.peaceinkurdistancampaign.com/activities/delist-t...

There are also some books and some academic papers on the history of the PKK and their ideology. Those written by independent academics are generally neither fully condemnatory nor exculpatory towards the PKK, but give a clear sense of how the term "terrorism" and its use is at least contestable, geopolitical, etc. And any familiarity at all with the history of the conflict makes it clear that the Turkish government is likewise guilty of state terror conducted against Kurdish civilian populations in Turkey for generations now.

that would technically fall under the definition of "anyone", yes...

[flagged]

it would be more reasonable, maybe, if the sanctions weren't primarily being used for the anti-encryption, anti-privacy crusade.

They should have hosted for Al Qaida and ISIS. Then they would have been invited to the White House and been sprayed with perfume by Trump:

https://www.israelhayom.com/2025/11/12/donald-trump-ahmed-al...

"Al-Sharaa, who until recently was known by his alias "al-Julani," was a longtime jihadist who was part of the ranks of organizations associated with al-Qaida and ISIS, and even orchestrated an attack against Israel – milestones that led to his designation as a "Specially Designated Global Terrorist" by the US, with a reward of approximately $10 million for information leading to his capture. President Trump decided to lift the sanctions on al-Sharaa, who has transformed into a political leader following the collapse of the Assad regime in December, when he assumed Syria's presidency as the leader of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham."

This tidbit should show people how the line between "terrorist", "freedom fighter" and "useful lackey" is razor thin.

You should never take the "terrorist" label at face value.

The US funded the Mujaheddin in the 80s in Afghanistan. Their first moves upon receiving the weapons was to throw grenades through the windows if Girls' schools.

They began as the "useful lackey", and the US lost control of the Wahabist movement that was amplified to fight Communism. Then they were "freedom fighters" to the religious extremists, and "terrorists" to fight a war against.

In your own example, Al-Sharaa(a product of weaponizing Wahhabism) did actual terrorism, and then was able to squeeze back into the "useful lackey" position, like many "terrorist"s have before him.

[dead]

This entire thread you’ve been talking about the PKK with very little evidence in support.

[flagged]

Is that more, or less, than the 1.2 million people Musk has killed so far with the illegal dismantlement of USAID? Musk aggressively advocates for the forcible ethnic cleansing of Europe.

I see people posting links to x.com which he uses to promote those views as well as platform other hate groups calling for violence and genocide against immigrants, trans people, etc.

Do acts gain moral validity under color of law alone?

well USAID where I live finances regime changes and I guess these are very net negative in terms of lives killed.

You see it everywhere.

Don't worry, the regime change part of USAID has been moved directly to Rubio in the State Department. Only the aid part has been removed.

NED bucks are flowing again too.

[dead]