[flagged]
Personally I'm not much a fan of Reddit or Twitter though, simply because the algorithmic nonsense is clearly there just to drive ad views and not to provide me with the interactions I'm there to have. Nostr is a much more pleasant experience.
Definitely more open discussion up in X. Here or in reddit everything gets flagged and banned pretty quickly which defeats the purpose.
And I don't mean hate, etc. Questioning some topics is basically taboo in a lot of media nowadays.
I don't even know what this means today. What things are "non-political"? Saying "there are no politics" seems like the same thing as "the status quo is the only possibility" - exactly the stagnation from which I want to move away on socials.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/politics
Narrow sense:
> the art or science of government: as [that] concerned with guiding or influencing governmental policy, ... [or] winning and holding control over a government; political actions, practices, policies, ... affairs or business
Broad sense:
> the total complex of relations between people living in society
In my experience, the question is almost always disingenuous. Topics being "political" is clearly the exception rather than the norm. The subtext of asking is something like "you are a bad person for objecting to my political statements (but I will still reserve the right to object to yours, should you decide that turnabout is fair play)".
> Saying "there are no politics" seems like the same thing as "the status quo is the only possibility" - exactly the stagnation from which I want to move away on socials.
There are all kinds of projects and activities that can be discussed without touching upon the relations between people in society, let alone matters of governmental policy or the quest for power.
There is nothing at all "stagnant" about a community focused on such things. OP is about the Free Software Foundation; focusing on discussion of the software has nothing to do with politics, and is generally improved by consciously avoiding politics.
The mere fact of existence of other political possibilities does not necessitate discussing those possibilities at every opportunity.
A number of their campaigns have direct policy/political goals: Public Money Public Code, Device Neutrality, etc.
The liberal-conservative political dichotomy was dying before Trump and is decidedly non-descriptive now.
Like, we can describe the illiberal wings of the right and left, MAGA and academic progressivism, respectively, and it will get readership in the New Yorker and Atlantic, but it’s not going to tell you much about who’s in power and why.
More specifically, complaining about “liberals who typically hate Musk” misses that most of Musk’s antagonism in the last 1 year has come from a different cohort than that which has soured on him since he bought Twitter which is again quite different from the crowd that never liked him at all. There is no “typical” Musk hater, even if we just focus on those who vote blue.
One is a political movement that controls the Presidency and several states. The other has a seat at the table in a few cities. If you’re seeing equal footing, you’re squinting hard.
> What do you mean by "illiberal" exactly, and why would that apply to progressives?
I’m specifically referring to the policing of speech. Brendan Carr telling broadcasters what they can and cannot say is illiberal. Same goes for the euphemism escalators that regulated the form, but not content, of classic political correctness. More broadly, liberalism triumphs tolerance while conservativism purity.
But to the point, LatinX and the Gulf of America being similarly dumb is an academic exercise. They’re functionally dumb and dangerous for entirely separate reasons. Compressing them into illiberalism is interesting, but not usefully descriptive.
Going back to OP, treating the world as pro- or anti-Musk is similarly uselessly reductive.
For that matter, if I check any random tweet link in an incognito tab and look over at the "What's happening" panel, it's all sports and celebrity nonsense, nothing "culture war" or political at all.
Otherwise the site is at most, "egg prices had tripled" bad. Far from cash on wheelbarrows bad.
I remember reporting open calls to violence in various socialist subreddits with no action ever taken as far as I could tell. That was about a decade ago.
There was also a comment (I still have the link saved and it was never deleted) from more than a decade ago, from a moderator at the time (account since deleted) of the main transgender subreddit, openly accusing transgender members of the sub of being drug addicts and prostitutes based on absolutely nothing beyond disagreeing with the moderation team's hard-line woke (it was called "SJW" back then, of course) posture.
now, you want to post conservative or rationalist ideas and better use 3 layers of metaphors or else you will be flagged within a minute
I see one side engendering discussion and debate. The other side wants to shut discussion down.
People on either side find comfort in echo chambers, but definitely one more than the other.
Every platform has their extremists and if you let the algorithm suggest content to you it will be stuff designed to fester hated and rage. However twitter is one of the few platforms that let you curate your feed, and I couldn’t use it without that.