We don’t know anyone would bother to make a malicious clone. Most likely some anarchist or liberal (heh) will buy it and do something silly like put an anti-ML screed or some NATO propaganda or something else simple there to “troll the tankies” so all this talk is a bit premature.
Also I wouldn’t count on all lemmy apps to necessarily cooperate. There have been other instances that have gone offline permanently for instance, is there any precedent to banning closed instances to prevent re-use? If not that would need to be discussed as an official suggested lemmy best practice. Otherwise the app devs, most of whom are probably not that sympathetic to places like that if not potentially outright hostile are unlikely to comply.
Personally I think you’re begging to open a whole can of worms proposing app-side site-bans. What’s to stop a liberal dev of a big lemmy mobile client from just adding “tankie” domains to prevent tankies from using their app? Once you plant the idea that it’s necessary to maintain a ban-list and do so, the temptation to abuse it is immediately there whereas right now it would be at least a little hassle.
People are detained, kept under guard 24/7 or at least for much of the day and attend classes. Introspection, journaling, confession of crimes, critical re-examination of actions and thinking are done. This takes time (months) and an inability for the subjects to just brush it off as a few hours of unpleasant challenging of their views but a determined repeated challenging in a group setting over time that encourages introspection, self-examination, self-criticism, and forced exposure to alternative views.
I can’t say for certain, most people in communist party ruled nations are not subject to re-education but to proper Marxist influenced education in the first place. Re-education is like deprogramming. I would assume historical materialism influences the curriculum.
Varies by nation. China had a cultural revolution though to be fair most people did not hold necessarily capitalist or liberal ideals but a mix of feudal and somewhat capitalist inspired. It was the same in the USSR, most of the people were not transitioning from a liberal capitalist mindset but from a feudal one. Those who were already of that mindset I suggest were mostly sidelined rather than deliberately subjected to attempts to change their views and make them into communists.
China did the same thing though they did have the experience of rehabilitating/re-educating their war criminals. You can see a little of this in The Last Emperor which has a number of scenes in the re-education camp though beware that was a movie made by a western non-communist though it’s content was approved by the CPC as it was filmed in China (during the opening up of the 90s admittedly so it’s false to say it’s 100% CPC approved so much as doesn’t have a bunch of horribly egregious 100 million dead propaganda inserted which they might have objected to but may have minor problems despite being a much fairer look than most western media would give such subjects).
You are not going to be able to “re-educate” people in a single presentation, not even if you had them captive for 12 hours each for two days could you do this. Instead you might seek at most to plant seeds, to challenge them a little. When dealing with potentially hostile audiences it can help to use techniques such as “acknowledgement AND” where you acknowledge something not too controversial for your audience, then pivot to add something a little controversial. Some people will be changed by an inflammatory presentation that strongly challenges their beliefs if those beliefs are not strongly held or supported by evidence, some people will dig in their heels or ignore it as much as possible. So there are many approaches that have some merit but the approaches with the most merit tend to aim towards planting seeds and doubts, to guiding the audience towards a conclusion but not stating it too explicitly for them and allowing them to arrive at it on their own in light of the facts given.