Sure, there are always outliers and you can correct me if I’m wrong, but that’s just the overall impression I have.
(I wasn’t sure if [email protected] or this community would fit better for this kind of question, but I assume it fits here.)
It’s a strength because we finally get to interact amongst the left without having to explain how society works to every ignorant conservatwat who thinks they can conservasplain some bullshit. It’s what makes it great.
Okay so yeah for actual conservatives totally. The Alt-Right is never going to be convinced no matter how many “facts” you explain to them anyway.
But you are considered a right-winger too, as well as I, by the likes of the folks in hexbear and Lemmygrad and lemmy.ml. We don’t view ourselves that way, but it’s the truth: compared to the likes of the Alt-Left, we legit are more “right-wing” than they are. And for good reason: e.g. we may not appreciate them but we’ve never actually murdered our landlords.
It’s certainly a weakness, especially since the Lemmy echo chamber is ever more extremist than the echo chambers you’d find on a place like Reddit or Truth Social. But I don’t think it makes it uniquely bad. I wouldn’t worry about it too much.
Maybe lemmy will grow over time to include more types of people.
Social unrest may evolve this network faster than expected, in particular ways that are not foreseen. So, in my mind there are two paths for lemmy. A stable growth or chaotic .
Edit : unrest in any country that has a lot of lemmy users if alternative social networks clamp down or are unsafe to use
reddit appears to have started to clean up discussions re current event. Looks like government and media push started yesterday, socials are following today. The Regime is clearly not happy.
Weakness, definitely. The range of “permitted” ideas is way too narrow.
I tend to agree with most common political stances on Lemmy, but still I feel I’m self-censoring occasionally.Many instances intentionally want an echo chamber. Posts and comments are often deleted even if they’re not abusive, if they are ideologically opposed.
deleted by creator
What ideas do you want to see more of?
It’s definitely a weakness. There is an entire spectrum of personal beliefs, but wherever you are, if yours don’t align with the mods you get censored. Reality is every new users first week is finding out where they ‘belong’ and this both discourages new users, and creates detrimental echo chambers.
In my experience, there’s only been a handful of mods and an equally small number of instances where I feel that is likely to happen, but for the most part it seems most mods have a pretty light touch. I’ve only had one negative experience with a mod, personally, and I post quite a bit.
If your “personal beliefs” entail persecuting others for their ethnic origin, sexual orientation or gender identity, you can fuck right off. Otherwise you won’t have any trouble fitting in here.
I think it’s primarily, but not exclusively, a strength. “We need more right-wing posters” is not something I’ve ever thought of Lemmy.
Preemptively let me say that I agree, although there is an entire spectrum along which people can hold their beliefs, and then on top of that there is the strength with which they hold them that can vary a lot - including some who are apolitical entirely as far as they themselves may be aware.
Also, recalling the phrase “first they came for…” - remember that WE are the “right-wingers”, from the perspective of instances such as lemmygrad.ml, lemmy.ml, and hexbear.net. I am not saying that Truth is subjective, but the definitions of those particular terms most definitely are.
So if they exclude us, and then we exclude “centrists”, who themselves exclude people to either side of them… ultimately what does that make us - conservatives ourselves, chasing some kind of ideological “purity”?
Let’s get back to me agreeing with you now, but clarifying why: we MUST be intolerant to those who are intolerant of others. However, to those who ARE tolerant… shouldn’t we be as tolerant to them as we can stand to be? As in, interact with them civilly even if we do not fully agree with everything they say?
So leftist vs. right(-ist?), I don’t care what someone is, so much as I care whether they are tolerant of others. BUT NOT TO THE INTOLERANT (i.e. not the Alt-Right, and also not the Alt-Left that I see hanging out on various Lemmy instances).
The political divesity is less of an issue than the political ferver. Most people don’t want to talk aboit politics. They want to avoid political discussions, and get upset when people do things as basic as pointing out that politics exists in their bubble.
The fediverse turns them off because it’s loaded with politically aware and stubbornly vocal people, not because there aren’t enough people playing apologetics for the ruling class
Yeah, normal people do not care about anything outside the very small bubble of their own life. They have a few interests, a few hobbies, watch a few shows, know a few other people, and that’s… kind of it.
On Lemmy.world it’s a weakness. Your instance may vary
Honestly, especially recently I feel like this place has been just a big Opinion Bubble/Echo Chamber and as someone who values trying to avoid these types of Bubbles and wanting to see what other opinions may look like this has consistently been one of my Biggest Issues with Lemmy. Not to mention that making it really hard to honestly recommend Lemmy to outsiders
Deposed CEO or health insurance grift?
deleted by creator
I’m sorry but libertarians and ancaps are just proto-feudalists that may like to smoke weed.
deleted by creator
i’d like a stronger anarchist/libertarian community on lemmy.
That’s one thing that I’ve been both disappointed and surprised to not see.
The anarchist community on Reddit is fairly large, but not very anarchist. There’s a very strong authoritarian bent to their claimed anarchism. I had hopes that the nature of this place would invite a community that was anarchist not only in name but in spirit, but I’ve seen surprisingly little sign of that, or even really of anarchism at all.
deleted by creator
db0 is real anarchists, as far as I can tell. Because they are not overbearing about it, it’s harder to be aware of them.
I think by definition, it’s easier to be aware of the “official” self-identified anarchist communities than the ones that are just doing their own thing.
I assumed that they were at least anarchism-adjacent - it’s pretty much a prerequisite for the bulk of their focus.
I hadn’t really looked into their political posting much though, and yeah - even with just a cursory glance, it’s promising.
And I hadn’t thought about that distinction between people who simply hold a position and people who “officially” wear the label in the context of anarchism (though I’ve noted it often with atheists), but yeah, there’s undoubtedly some truth there.
Thanks for the heads-up.
The slrpnk admins, as far as I can tell, stand in the same relationship to anarchism that your average megachurch organization does with Christianity.
If all you look at is the words, it looks like they’re supporting it.
The type of anarchism that says, “You must agree with my anarchism, and if you have some incorrect view, I’ll use my powers to remove you from the space” is not actually anarchism. It’s actually strikingly reminiscent of how the Russian implementation of communism had nothing to do with worker-led socialism that it was branded as. They implemented freedom by declaring themselves the arbiters of what were the allowed types of freedom and ruthlessly repressing anything else, which isn’t how it works.
In general, I think it’s a myth that if you disagree with liberal orthodoxy on lemmy.world, you’ll be banned. Plenty of people on lemmy.world constantly criticize the liberal orthodoxy and it’s fine. The people purporting the myth are either:
- Being flaming cocks and then claiming they were banned for their factual beliefs when they get banned, when that wasn’t the issue
- Or else trying to make themselves feel better about the censorship of liberals that happens on their own instances, by claiming lemmy.world is doing the same to their “side” when they aren’t.
The occasional whining about how unfair it is that you can’t post anti-Israel stories on lemmy.world, for example, is nothing to do with reality, but is instead a disguised yearning for a space where you can’t post pro-Israel stories, and the mods will enforce that political viewpoint using their powers so the speaker can feel comfortable because all they see is things that they already agree with.
deleted by creator
Yeah, those mods are bad, and they definitely exist including unapologetically on the tankie instances. I was just saying that the mirror-image bad mod, who will delete anything anti-Israel, is almost entirely a self-serving myth by a selected group that likes to pretend.
On the other hand, if someone repeats a lie often enough, doesn’t that make it true? :-P
I absolutely think that’s the idea, yes.
The world is a complicated place. Part of the optimization our brain does, to even be able to make sense of it at all without being overwhelmed, is to absorb things that you see other people saying to each other, and incorporate them into how you see the world. So I’m always interested when I see a variety of people all saying the same thing, even though that thing is demonstrably not true if you think for yourself for a few seconds.
In this case I think it’s just some kind of internal cope that they’re doing for themselves, and the repetition leading to other people potentially absorbing it is purely accidental, but it’s still a dangerous pattern.
I tend to love reading your comments - they are insightful and deep:-).
When people behave identically as a “bot” would - passing along what it has heard, without thinking twice or even so much as once about it - they can act as part of that same, dark anti-pattern. Except the danger is so much more real then b/c they “genuinely” hold their belief?
I thought that a lot of it was due to enshittification reasons to maximize profit incentive, e.g. making it hard to “search” on Reddit, yet exceedingly easy to “post”, while at the same time making it harder to read the community rules prior to doing so, all to maximize “engagement”. But it seems more related to human nature, which will never change.
Hey, thank you! Yeah. The nature of the network can induce people to behave nice or behave mean, and to put a lot or a little effort into the stuff they are posting. I think a lot of the anonymity and ease-of-getting-on of the modern Lemmy-type internet means that you get kind of the lowest common denominator of human nature. It’s unfortunately true of commercial networks as it is of free ones.
It’s a weakness. We need more anti-authoritarians here for sure. And even conservatives if nothing else so they can represent their own opinions rather than just laughing at straw-man versions of what neolibs want to say they think. I have moments I hate it here but there’s nowhere good to go and I guess I add a little diversity.
I disagree with the conservatives part. Their ideology does not deserve a place at the adults’ table. It is far too bent on undermining democracy, equity, and egalitarian society.
EDIT: To clarify, this is elementary “Paradox of Tolerance”. Those that wish to undermine democracy in an equitable society cannot be tolerated without making an end to democracy inevitable. Not all opinions are created equal. For example: “I think trans people should receive additional state-funded support.” and “I think that trans people should be murdered and/or the state should cultivate an environment amplifying their likelihood to commit suicide.” (the prevailing view expressed by the far-right through their actions and legislation) are opinions that should not be given equal treatment.
Saying, “I don’t like what they say so they shouldn’t have a voice” sounds a lot like undermining democracy to me. Them living in conservative echo chambers doesn’t increase dialog or challenge their beliefs either. Divided media and divided opinions are the tools to take down a nation. Supporting this kind of division strikes me as an example of the main kind of foreign interference this country is crumbling because of. If that was your goal, I guess congratulations?
Paradox of Tolerance. Those that intend to undermine a just and equitable society that tolerates the existence of all kinds of people cannot be tolerated.
But do we actually wait until we see how people think, or just silence them based on their opinion on one or twy divisive issues as a litmus test to justify our own intolerance? “They don’t support trans women in women sports so none of their opinions are valid.”
It’s, unfortunately, very subjective. A statement like that could be from a place of ignorance that they are willing to dig into and grow as a person. Any judgement has to include whether good faith is intended, etc. Conservativism itself is incompatible with motion towards a more just world, as rigid hierarchy is part of its core, and it is also an ideology rife with bad faith actors. Giving extra space for such an ideology that already has a far louder voice than it should have does not result in anything productive.
deleted by creator
Haha ML loves to ban you for even the slightest challenge of their views.
deleted by creator
Talking about Yogthos eh?
Because everyone knows, the best response when your lack of sources is met with sources is just “🤡”
deleted by creator
There is a bunch of angry brigading here for any of a multitude of reasons, and that shear wall of vitriol thrown at people doesn’t help lemmy grow.
Normally I’d say it was a weakness but the right has significantly departed from reality in most countries for way too long now. It’s incredibly rare to find a right-winger who can be present in a discussion without spewing a whole lot of vile conspiracy hate fascist bullshit.
So I find their absence refreshing, desirable and a strength of Lemmy.
Please… this is a serious display of availability bias.
Let’s face it: the demographic here is just a hyper concentrated version of Reddit, which itself is mostly middle-upper class tweenagers from affluent countries. They get online and get convinced that everyone is just like them.
The average person that hangs out on Reddit-like forums absolutely does not represent the population at large, and any “right-winger who can be present in a discussion without spewing a whole lot of vile conspiracy hate fascist bullshit” has learned that there is no way one can have a reasonable exchange of ideas in any forum like this.
deleted by creator
I know it’s comfortable to sit and call anything slightly right of ultra socialism as ‘right wing’ but a spectrum exists.
To conflate republican evangelical dominionist Christians with liberals is peak hubris.
There is a saying: ‘when you’re a hammer, every problem is a nail’. When you reduce everything to class warfare you’re not engaging in an effective discourse to reduce harm in the world. You’re just pontificating on the merits of socialism, which yea, we all agree are neat. But so what? You think folding everyone else into a basket gives you credence or helps the discourse in any way?
deleted by creator
I think my issue is with the usage of the phrase “right wing” because we need something scathing to label liberals. It doesn’t really contribute anything to the discourse except create layers of exclusion.
Liberalism, broadly, is not interested in supporting or enabling hierarchies. The only thing they share in common with right wing conservatism is the ownership of private property -but that’s it. So lumping them all in the same bucket isn’t doing much for anyone except creating more exclusion at the risk of pushing forward socialist policies. The reality is liberals are probably more likely to favor equality, even if it’s just ideological. Shouldn’t we strive to bring more people on board and build bridges rather than continue this bizarre war of artrition?
deleted by creator
We don’t have to have an argument over it. It’s ok to have a conversation. I’m familiar with the ‘liberals are right wing’ talking point.
I’m just trying to understand what exactly it is that defines ‘right wing’ and how we define ‘liberalism’ . You’re right, it IS a semantic discussion, but clearly the implication is that liberalism is on par with being right wing. So, nonetheless, a semantic relabeling which is not devoid of consequences.
So I’m wondering, at what point do those two overlap (liberalism and right wing politics)? Is it the right to private property? Beyond that, what exactly makes liberalism ‘right wing’?
Liberals are right wing
Case closed.
deleted by creator
but most of the world considers them to be right wing.
Yep. I’m fiscally conservative, mildly sympathetic to people who fear and resist change, and fond of the pragmatic pursuit of libertarian ideals, where that’s possible.
I also feel that how others do sex is none of my damn business, taxes supporting social services are necessary, and equitably applied rule of law is critical for any real economic prosperity.
On the scale of history, I suspect that makes me centrist or even a moderate conservative.
In my country, and today, somehow, astonishingly, this combination makes me what most would call very left leaning.
I feel that the right has gone insane and continues to alienate people who might otherwise have been allies.
deleted by creator
No. Liberalism is against most things that the right wing of the political spectrum explicitly stands for. Liberalism exists as a counter argument to conservatism. As I mentioned earlier US political language has twisted and distorted what these words really mean.
deleted by creator
No. I’m not talking from a US perspective. I’m talking from a political perspective. Liberalism is a moral and political philosophy - that is available in more than one flavour. Many things liberalism stands for are incompatible with right wing governments. Conservatism is far right? No, fascism is far right and there is an enormous difference between being conservative and being a fascist. Right and left are both part of a spectrum and run the whole gamut from dipping your toe in the water to being fully submerged. It’s disingenuous to suggest otherwise.
Your points about social bubbles and echo chambers are true, but experiencing the displeasure of having to routinely interact with rightwingers in person verifies that they have fully-fledged conviction in their “vile conspiracy hate fascist bullshit”. They can’t have a reasonable exchange of ideas because they bring nothing reasonable or empathetic to the table.
I find the same on the left wing. Everytime I put out a slightly right wing position I get attacked and a ton of down votes.
Every time anyone mentions on Lemmy right wing positions it is with only to attack a strawman version that is very removed from what most right wing people think/do.
Every time anyone mentions on Lemmy right wing positions it is with only to attack a strawman version
It would help if you would be more precise. You are using a “feels like” statement here, which I have to disagree with b/c it is objectively false: all it would take would be to find a singular example wherein it was not true, at which point “every time” is shown to be invalid.
But often that does occur, yes. Sometimes our choice of wording can impede rather than aid in understanding?
And I say this as someone who seems to be more often misunderstood than not, go figure :-|.
I’m sure a counter example exists, but I’ve been around for year and not seen it yet. Though I’ll accept that the exception probably exists.
I empathize, as a human being you have to realize that it is YOU that has to use politics as a tool & NOT BECOME a tool of Politics (Do you get what I mean) Use both Right & Left policies, I think it was called Moderatism or Communitarianism
You’re comparing downvotes with “vile conspiracy hate fascist bullshit”. The behavior I’m talking about isn’t hurtful in the social-rejection way that downvotes are, it goes way way beyond that. Can you see the difference?
Downvotes can’t actually hurt you.
Personally, I’m fine with saying unpopular things and getting downvoted for it. Mods removing a disallowed viewpoint is something different.
Mods removing a disallowed viewpoint is something different.
They will only do that if the opinion actually resonates lol
Haha yes, that’s usually the issue. I talked down below about getting banned on slrpnk because of some things I was saying. The comment thread with all the highly-upvoted replies getting removed by the mod, and the downvoted stuff intact, is hilarious to me:
https://slrpnk.net/post/14823401/11895951
The same mod also had a habit of arguing with people, while removing their comments but leaving his own side of the argument intact. He’s still a moderator there. In my opinion slrpnk needs to spend less time talking about anarchism and more time embodying anarchism.
Removed Comment I am gratified by the rate of downvotes on this. Greta Thunberg would, I think, be disappointed and angry that anyone would take what she said as a justification for ways to help get Trump elected. Let me highlight the very clearly written part that you seem to have missed: > It is probably Impossible to overestimate the consequences this specific election will have for the world and for the future of humanity. > > There is no doubt that one of the candidates — Trump — is way more dangerous than the other. If you want real positive change, listen to Greta and fight for change outside the system. If you want third parties, support RCV and proportional representation, to make them viable. If you want the end of the fucking world, then don’t vote, or vote for spoiler candidates within the current system that makes them unelectable. Edit: Formatting by [email protected]
reason: Electoralism, liberalism
well you did kinda invade their safe space with common sense ideas, shit lord hehe
“We’re anarchists.”
“Cool. Here’s an urgent problem I see for the world that I think we should work on.”
“SHIT COCK GET OUT DISALLOWED We don’t say that here. You’re receiving a gentle ban, to think about what you’ve done. Be better.”
That’s the current modding situation across any community focused on working class politics… as if people running them are not interested in helping the peasants.
Why would anyone act like that on social media… for free at that
Oh my god… This is spot on. I feel like everyone here is mostly larping.
This moderator behavior here is exactly what you’d see on reddit lol
I use solarpunk and disappointed that it happened to you. I felt like solarpunk was the best instance Lemmy has, it feels like it has the least amount of echo chamber. Maybe I’m wrong.
I moderate my own community in solarpunk and I will try my best to not be like the moderator you talk about
I think you will see that these accusations have little substance, are taken out of context and argued in bad faith 🤷♂️
All I’ve done is link to the comments section illustrating what I was saying had happened, had happened.
Here he is, arguing with people while removing their comments and leaving his comments in place: https://slrpnk.net/post/14823401/11894346
I have no idea why you’re defending this guy. Like I said, the communities that try to “protect” their points of view, saying that one viewpoint is permitted in their space but other ones are will get you banned, generally become laughingstocks over time. It’s very different from protecting against abuse or racism, when you “protect” your space against people who don’t agree with some particular detail the way some particular person has interpreted it, and appoint an arbiter of what are the allowed interpretations, to ban anyone they disagree with. I think you should abandon that practice, and the censorship of ideas you disagree with, if you want to say that you’re supporting an instance that respects individual human freedom.
I don’t really have a problem with you in general, I was a little bit surprised that you came out swinging to defend this moderator. Maybe this all sounds like sour grapes on my part, but that is usually the result of banning people for disagreeing with you. It sparks a surprising amount of resentment.
I know you’re not the same moderator they were talking about, but I just want to make you aware of this: https://ponder.cat/comment/1193264
What are you talking about… This is the experience of most of us that dare slightly disagree on anything. It shouldn’t be this way
They don’t hurt, but they still do not feel nice.
Just remember that the first person to say the world went around the sun got downvoted into oblivion… but it is factually accurate and a giant leap towards out current understanding of the physical realm. I’m happy for people to disagree with my views. Fuck, I probably disagreed with half of them, thirty years ago.
It’s a weakness in the sense that there are times this place turns into a straight-up echo chamber…
But when there is actual debate going on, it tends to be a lot more civil than on other sites (most of the time)
Yeah hasn’t been helpful for getting a sense for the minds of the masses but generally a lot more grounded than reddit
Also though echo chambers are bad most of the time for most people, occasionally they help in challenging our own beliefs but only when engaged critically.
For people saying it’s a weakness because it causes or is caused by censorship from the mods, are you directly experiencing it? If yes, on which instance?
I got involved in a few heated discussions with members, but I was never bothered by any moderator/admin. I’m not sure if this is due to my views (anarchism / libertarian communism) but I don’t think so since they are not the ones of the main instances I roam (.world which seems quite soc-dem to me and all the tankies one).
To me all of this seems like an overall positive thing : the lack of hardcore far right dudes is a big plus, and I don’t think the political views can really influence the quality and quantity of content you can propose otherwise (which is to my eyes why there is not that much people here). Like I don’t think rightwing people will flee from Lemmy because of the political thing, but like i think most people do: mostly because there is not that many people and therefore that many content to begin with. But there again, I never directly experienced or witnessed political censorship or exclusion, and it seems a common experience so i might not have the best point of view.
I was banned on slrpnk because I said that Trump coming to power would be a dangerous thing for the world, people in Gaza included, and asked some questions about the point of view that was being expressed.
https://slrpnk.net/post/14823401
https://ponder.cat/modlog/2765?page=1&actionType=All&userId=201449
To me, the issue isn’t that we need to make a safe space for MAGA. Those people tend to be so obnoxious that there doesn’t even need to be a special rule for them to keep them out. The issue is that a lot of moderators seem to be nominating themselves the bosses of which are the permitted ideologies for people to talk about. Slrpnk does this, lemmy.ml does this. A lot of the niche “leftist” communities do it to anyone who’s a mainstream liberal.
Some of the big lemmy.world communities also do their own brand of bad moderation, but it’s usually not ideological, it’s just stupid.
Okay thanks for sharing your experience, it seems indeed a very good example of how bad it can be Thanks also for the explanation about the instance in the answer
Oh. The mods on that “anarchist” comm are bad faith actors and I doubt that they are actually anarchists - more likely authoritarian wreckers. The only things that they liked before the election was spreading tankie, anti-Biden, and anti-electoralist/accelerationist propaganda. For example, they would post anti-Biden op-eds then ban anyone who disagreed or pointed out that accelerationism has literally never had a positive outcome in recorded human history for “electioneering”.
That’s an interesting theory… I think there are some selected mods who are exactly that, but I don’t think that’s exclusive to slrpnk. One of my little conspiracy theories is that those bad actors got really good on Reddit at how to “take over” a subreddit so they can start bending it to be the way they want it to be, and I think a couple of the slrpnk mods have wormed their way into the good graces of the admins there and then used the anarchism as cover for pushing authoritarian agendas. I guess it’s possible that the slrpnk mod community as a whole is bad-faith actors, but I don’t think so.
I got curious about that one slrpnk mod who I tangled with who was pushing Green Party propaganda and deleting my comments about it, and just checked to see what he’s been up to since the election. My guess was that he would have switched to pushing “hard anarchism,” violence, reasons to hate the right wing, guns, things like that to stoke division. Nope. It’s been total crickets.
Turns out his passion for anarchism was fueled by the election, and since it’s over, he hasn’t had as much of a reason to be passionate about it. He posted 5 articles a few days ago, and right after the election he got in some kind of argument about the election which wound up getting a bunch of his comments removed, but other than that, no anarchism or participation of any kind. Weird how that works.
I think a couple of the slrpnk mods have wormed their way into the good graces of the admins there and then used the anarchism as cover for pushing authoritarian agendas.
That’s exactly what I think. I don’t think that it’s slrpnk as a whole but that anarchism comm on the instance had very problematic mods (who have indeed gone silent, pretty much proving that they were bad faith actors). They constantly acted to spread propaganda and silence anyone who disagreed. IIRC, one even all but outted themselves as a state actor. They’re all quiet now because they got what they wanted; successfully sewing enough discord in anarchist and other anti-authoritarian communities to prevent critical mass or embrace of effective strategies for positive societal change.
Yeah. I think they’re pretty good at exploiting tribal thinking, such that “he’s an anarchist just like us” or “he’s a vegan just like us” leads people to rally around someone, and overlook weird things that they’re doing.
Sit at a table with Nazis and you just make more nazis
That’s literally not true.
Even Daryl Davis says that there’s more Nazis every day
https://www.newsweek.com/daryl-davis-black-lives-matter-kkk-racism-white-genocide-police-1523315
