Lemmy's default instance leans heavily to the contemporary american idea of leftism. This doesn't affect the actual software in any way, only that community is a bit disturbing.
I do not mean ideologically. Just in conversation. More of us learning to talk with one another better is a really good thing.
The American idea of leftism varies widely, and on all axis too.
A similar thing can be found in the right.
Both have populist factions that have a lot in common. Many identify as indie too. They lack a solid party home.
Both have moderate and conservative factions too.
Authoritarianism is also on the rise generally.
All of this can be disturbing. I find the economic policy that way right now myself. Labor seems to be organizing though. Others see that as disturbing!
What I know, having had a ton of conversations in various venues around the nation is the body politic is far more complex. Everyone is listening to some loud or compelling voices and not talking with one another near enough to garner a better sense of where people are at and how policy might make a whole lot better sense.
It does not have to be disturbing. Shouldn't in my view.
Seems acceptable to me (anyone else can host their own index right?) just trying to understand.
I'm imagining - finding a topic or person or something that you want to follow, and then, your 'instance' / host pops up with "the thing you are trying to get data from is banned from this host".
Seems like an excellent opportunity to upsell someone to starting their own host / own rules system.. Star your own droplet for $10 a month maybe?
Some useful links that explain it further:
https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/7/15183128/mastodon-open-sou...
I did say it was worth doing, more or less.
it is not worth anyone's time
People experiencing hard times is one catalyst.
Another is loneliness.
There are others.
There are parts of society well served by markets and other parts that really aren't. Same goes for applying socialist ideas to problems.
Recognizing just that fact is a basis for conversation that can lead somewhere meaningful for all involved.
The Left isn't averse to debate. The Left is averse to repeating the same tired arguments about iPhones and authority and "human nature" until the heat death of the universe. Things that have been addressed in great detail for over a century.
There is actually a lively debate taking place. It just typically doesn't take the form of Zizek vs. Peterson SuperBowl style spectacles. It takes place in literature, and in meetings among organizers trying to actually accomplish their goals. People like that don't give a flying fuck what John Stossel or Ben Shapiro have to say. This mainstream "debate culture" is so far detached from the actual struggles taking place.
For what it’s worth if your leftists will only talk to people who already accept their worldview and assume everyone else is like Ben Shapiro, it validates the point that they are not available for the kinds of discussion we are talking about.
I like to lead with how is it all for you and how did you arrive where you are politically?
Common struggles, life stories, other things help start a conversation.
Then it's give and take.
The idea of any side, particular ideology being right, best fit, one size fits all is crazy! That isn't reality.
Talk about it from there.
Many would agree money in politics is bad, for example. I sure do. Another interesting chat is the for profit motive.
Compare and contrast public utilities. The one where I live is straight up government, runs at cost plus. A few miles down the road it's private. Runs at cost plus margin, plus...
All other variables are the same, and what's the impact?
Power is very reliable where I live. It's not so much down the road. Why?
There are many things to discuss like this and get a sense of where the ideologies apply well and where they don't, and after a time, people begin to realize "their team" is playing them for profit due to corruption.
And they are! Make no mistake!
Gets better from there.
I am having these every chance I get. Every time I get someone out of the ideology as means to better ends trap, that's someone who will consider policy, features, benefits, costs, risks and that's all we can ask for, and all we need.
It's also someone willing to talk about money in politics, legal corruption here and what that all really means in terms of ordinary people getting reputable, meaningful representation.
All of that is a foundation for action later on when this stuff bubbles up into something we can actually act on.
The vast majority of people do not want to have that conversation (hence the flagged post of the grandparent).
I find the answer in most cases is worries over personal judgement.
More of us quit doing that and more people will have that conversation.
I usually lead with, "ignore the talking heads on TV."
Worked wonders for me. I enjoy politics and culture again as do others I talk to.
The other basic worry is inability to manage a conversation coupled with the idea of ideology being the means to better ends rather than the reasoning tool it really is. A person who maintains one ideology, sans a working understanding of others, will feel threatened when its merit is challenged.
Fact is we have many solutions to the problems we face with no requirement they all conform to a single ideological frame.
Does that lend itself more to your intellectual curiosity?
There are obviously other political spectrums, but those are all extremely insignificant minorities. Surely you don't only find satiation to your curiosities in said extreme minorities, that seems rather unfulfilling as any meaningful advancement in them is highly statistically unlikely in you or your direct childrens lifetimes.
Having "leftist" in the description makes people (at least myself) automatically jump to the conclusion that one can get cancelled/banned/deplatformed for posting any thought or argument that disagrees with the mainstream. I'm not a conservative or anti-vaxxer or anything like that, but this culture really creeps me out.
Also in the About page the author of the software says things like:
> [Reddit's] libertarian founders have allowed some of the most racist and sexist online communities to fester on reddit for years
(Implying that this community wouldn't permit certain types of discussion, defined by very broad and ambiguous terms that were weaponized such that they can be used against anyone who disagrees with the leftist ideology in any way).
And criticizes reddit for being:
> liberal, and pro-US, not left (leftism referring to the broad category of anti-capitalism)
I wouldn't be comfortable with participating in a discussion moderated by a person who says things like that.
Also, as a person who grew up in a country ruined by "anti-capitalism", I find that trend in American culture extremely disturbing. Can you think of any anti-capitalist country (now, or at any point in history) that you'd like to live in?
Luckily this is a free software and anyone is free to run their own instance.
Politics aside - I wonder if it would be possible to create an instance focused on free speech, without automatically attracting all the worst people?
Capitalism != individual freedom != democracy. Those are all separate axes.
> Having "leftist" in the description makes people (at least myself) automatically jump to the conclusion that one can get cancelled/banned/deplatformed for posting any thought or argument that disagrees with the mainstream. I'm not a conservative or anti-vaxxer or anything like that, but this culture really creeps me out.
Outside of maybe 8chan, what is a community that won't ban you for saying something they find harmful? Left/right/liberal/conservative communities all have this.
It's totally fine if a self-described left-leaning community is not for you, but there's nothing weird or creepy about it.
Would you be willing to name this county?
Every community has ideas about what's right and wrong, and there will always be people who disagree. Moderation will always be required because that's just the nature of communities.
> Politics aside - I wonder if it would be possible to create an instance focused on free speech, without automatically attracting all the worst people?
To the point I just made: no, it's not possible refrain from moderating a community and then avoid having people there who engage in behavior you don't like. If your definition of "free speech" includes a complete lack of moderation, then you'll always run into this problem.
I haven't said anything meaningful about politics.
What I said, perhaps a bit too abruptly to be well understood, was "the use of a non-meaningful piece of slang that is almost entirely held by a specific group of poorly informed folks is a red flag that any attempt to discuss politics will end in a likely mix of muh jerbs and dumbocrats."
The phrase "leftist" properly applies to a group of people who essentially haven't existed in the United States in around 80 years.
It would be like if someone went to a baseball stadium and started calling people soccer hooligans. That is not a person from whom to learn sports.
Thanks for the attempt at a table turn. You've been a delight
There are large numbers of people who describe themselves today as leftists, and there have been for the past 80 years. People across the political spectrum, academics, and the news media use the term in relation to contemporary politics.
If you are using a definition that stopped being relevant 80 years ago, it will be hard for you to have a coherent discussion with people today.
I don't think it's even worth considering such a community left-wing. They're more like an anime poisoned grooming circle that embraced red aesthetics for shock value.
However pathetic that sounds though, I'm the bigger loser for even being familiar with this nonsense.
-They didn't go to Lemmygrad
-No definition of leftism would exclude the very leftist people who went over to Hexbear, the Lemmy instance for exiled r/Chapotraphouse posters
-they don't seem to be particularly into anime
-they are very into left politics, socialism, trade unionism, anti-imperialism, and so on. So like they are left-wing
^So that's where this quote came from, TIL..
https://quillette.com/2017/01/12/the-blank-slateism-of-the-r...
You have a lot of these so-called leftists rebelling against the philosophies of Marx and other communist philosophers on very fundamental issues (e.g. gun ownership for the proletariat, or the freedom of speech) all because of the current political climate in America. At the same time, these people will support and protect Big Tech and other capitalist interests when it is politically convenient to do so. I've heard American leftism once jokingly called Socialism with Silicon Valley Characteristics.
Ask any one of these new-age leftists what they think of Alex Jones' YouTube channel being banned, and they will hit you with a response that would disturb any of the Gen X leftists who grew up in an era where Communist was a dirty word and the protection of free speech was a top-most necessity. New-age leftists have grown up in the left-sympathetic social media era and cannot conceptualize the pendulum ever swinging the opposite direction.
Setting up your own community with specific standards is totally fine imo.
In some sense I agree, but what happens when these communities begin to overflow with people, and chaos increases? It leads to opinion suppression( no I'm not talking about extreme opinions on any side of the political spectrum , I'm talking about opinions which differ from the status quo ), echo-chamber creation, and worst of all, unnecessary aggressive behaviour and mud slinging.
it's unastounding to me in the extreme that the right has very little presence on most of the fediverse.
I like to believe 'we' are in a real majority. The point is the same, even if this isn't true: It's not some mythic 50/50 world, and there is no phantom "equity" out there which is a "balance" between libertarian-right, centerist and left views.
Apes, penguins, take your pick. Collectivism is out there. Its a basic model. I'd call it "herd mentality" but that tends to have negative connotations. Sure, there are apex elements in collectivism. It doesn't undermine the main thesis: There is more collectivism, essential left-wing thinking, than a lot of people credit.
In the US, because of individualism, this is often ignored. The belief "most" people in the US simply want to a) be left alone to b) sink or swim on their own and c) pay less taxes is a bit distorted. Really? They just want c).
Capitalism allows people to organize collectively too. Proponents would claim that it enables more freedom to do so than ‘leftism’.
The United States leftism leans heavily to the contemporary idea of all other developed western nations rightism... so are we to be seen as a bit disturbing by the rest of our nation peers? (hint, they mostly seem to :D )
Our far left is most other places moderate left. Do you not see this to be true?
Our far right is just full blown fascist/Christofacist now. We have $10,000 bounties on the heads of those assisting in seeking medical care in one of our largest states now.