Spyke
fediverse·FediversebyTeknevra

Is Lemmy becoming too ideologically homogeneous? Thoughts on political diversity in the Fediverse.

I've been using Lemmy for a while now, and I've noticed something that I was hoping to potentially discuss with the community.

As a leftist myself (communist), I generally enjoy the content and discussions on Lemmy.

However, I've been wondering if we might be facing an issue with ideological diversity.

From my observations:

  1. Most Lemmy Instances, news articles, posts, comments, etc. seem to come from a distinctly leftist perspective.
  2. There appears to be a lack of "centrist", non-political, or right-wing voices (and I don't mean extreme MAGA-type views, but rather more moderate conservative positions).
  3. Discussions often feel like they're happening within an ideological bubble.

My questions to the community are:

  • Have others noticed this trend?
  • Do you think Lemmy is at risk of becoming an echo chamber for leftist views, a sort of Truth Social, Parler, Gab, etc., esque platform, but for Leftists?
  • Is this a problem we should be concerned about, or is it a natural result of Lemmy's community-driven nature?
  • How might we encourage more diverse political perspectives while still maintaining a respectful and inclusive environment?
  • What are the potential benefits and drawbacks of having a more politically diverse user base on Lemmy?

As much as I align with many of the views expressed here, I wonder if we're missing out on valuable dialogue and perspective by not having a more diverse range of political opinions represented.

I'm genuinely curious to hear your thoughts on this.

View original on lemmy.world

Given the recent right wing takeover of other social media sites and the glorification of hate speech I am fine not seeing that bullshit spread here.

124
lemm.ee

This is bad for the health of lemmy though, I think. A discussion board/framework should be politically neutral, while still employing rules on hate speech based on the voice of the masses.

If you want to talk hate speech, I've seen numerous accounts on lemmy instances of people advocating for murder or other violence against "billionaires" or anyone with a significant wealth. Or same with right-wing ideals, I've seen users advocating similar broad calls for violence based on pretty poor assumptions against the entire right-wing USA block.

-16

Considering the Overton window, there's also the fact that what is left and right varies from country to country and culture to culture. For example, a centerist in America would be considered right wing when compared to a centrist from Vietnam or Cuba.

2

If someone wanted to make a well-formed right wing argument I doubt they'd get too much backlash. But it's all bigotry and lies and conspiracy theories at this point so they get shitcanned.

Fighting back against the ultra wealthy who are killing our people and our planet is not the same as punching down on minorities who are just trying to exist.

21
discuss.tchncs.de

I think the idea that all viewpoints are equally valuable and need to be given equal weight or volume in discussions is incredibly fallacious. Left wing ideals are backed by a multitude of research as well as ethical and moral philosophies. I don't know how you could be a leftist and say "what this place really needs is more right-wing voices" with a straight face. The whole "im just asking questions, everyone deserves to be heard, i just want to hear both sides of the argument" is a common tactic the right uses to try to seem reasonable and propagandize more people. Some ideas aren't worth hearing out and can only do damage to those who listen.

110

A lack of opposing viewpoints is a fast-track to a closed-minded approach to interactions. I see far too many people, of all backgrounds, enter into engagements with a "you're wrong and I'm right" mindset born from only entertaining their own ideals. Day after day of "other side bad" comments that entirely miss why that other side believes what they do in the first place. I don't see how that helps anyone unless your goal is to pat each other on the back while the country drifts farther apart. Personally speaking, reading entire threads like this gets tiresome and while I am glad we don't have the same level of bad faith right-wing spam that other platforms do, I wish we had a more open atmosphere.

5

Casualy defined leftist as brainwashed lol. You guys seem to love the "How to hate freespeech 101" course.

-1
lemmy.world

I would argue that wider community cohesion and thus tolerance of other viewpoints is important. Without hearing and understanding why these other points of view exist, understanding and accepting these people is hard.

Branding someone's point of view as inherently or even 'factually' wrong is pretty blunt, alienating and invalidating IMO. I prefer a left-wing world view that tolerates people who don't have the same understanding as me.

-3
discuss.tchncs.de

Patience and willingness to educate people is necessary in any community, as is a certain amount of tolerance for disagreement, in topics that aren't harming anyone or restricting anyones roghts. In our current political environment, the predominent viewpoints of many people are outright dangerous and violent towards dissenters or outsiders, and those views do not deserve to be platformed. This is all based on context obviously, as everything is. If my neighbor is adamant that an unregulated free market society benefits everyone and is the best option despite all evidence to the contrary, and won't be swayed by any argument or proof i offer, then fine. I just wont talk about the economy with them. But if my neighbor starts to say that trans people are mentally ill, and mexicans are subhuman, and palestinians deserve to be eradicated just for being born, thats a whole other matter. In the world we live in now we have to be very careful about what information is being propagated and consumed and absorbed by people who may lack the skills or understanding to resist it. As i said, some ideas are not worthy of repetition.

35
lemmy.world

Yeah but this thread was supposed to be about whether ideological diversity is important, not whether hate speech is important.

-4
discuss.tchncs.de

It was about a lack of right wing viewpoints being problematic. Can you give me an example of a right wing viewpoint that is worth discussing, not scientifically unsound, not hateful, and is currently missing from lemmy? Cause if there is value in these ideas being discussed you must be able to give at least one example right?

28
Frank Casareply
frank.casa

@emeralddawn45 It depends on whether we are talking about the hateful far right or conservatives.

Some things frequently talked about by conservatives, classic liberals, and centrists include:

  1. Limitations on government power, including how to prevent a politician from becoming a dictator. This includes checks and balances on power, separation of power, and the dynamic between the states and the federal government.

  2. Protecting peoples civil rights, including the rights of minorities. Opposing police brutality, protecting free speech, protecting the right of association, protections against illegal search and seizures, etc.

  3. The right of people to own firearms, as allowed by the second amendment. This includes minorities and black people, who have the same rights under the Constitution as everyone else.

  4. Health care reform. They want health care reform as much as the left does, but they usually disagree on how to reform the health care system. For example, the left usually wants to create a government monopoly, while the right usually wants to break up monopolies and distrusts the government.

  5. How to give the power back to the people, since corporations and the elite seem to have taken over this country. Like #4, they agree that things need to change, but often have different ideas on how to change it.

I could go on.

Don't confuse the hateful right with the moderate centrists and right-leaning voters. Most people have the same concerns the left does, but have a different perspective on it. And most people aren't hateful. Maybe misinformed, but not hateful.

-7
lemmy.ml

Remember that they asked for things that are currently missing from Lemmy. Do you think any of those are?

14

Yeah, this is it. There is no moderate conservative anymore. The moderate conservative has become the moderate democrat. The only way republicans win is by strangling human rights and stirring discord.

Try going into a conservative subreddit and argue for any of the things above. You’ll get downvoted to hell or even banned.

8

Anarchists discuss basically all of that and aren't right wing

8

Very well put. The general summaries are spot on.

Too frequently are the concepts overlooked and some specific detail (often trivial) becomes the focus and divisive point preventing discussion or understanding.

-5
lemmy.world

The value is in being accepting that other people don't see the world in the same way as you, and treating them with respect.

The value is having a society that is tolerant of diversity of opinion.

-7
lemmy.ml

This is not an universal truth.

Nazism is explicitly deemed unworthy of respect in some legal systems, like Germany or the UK. MAGAs, white supremacists, and alt-righters are objectively too close to nazism, therefore their opinions are unworthy of respect to start with.

There is also the paradox of intolerance. If you let these people in, to respect their opinion, they will take over and deprive people of the right to live. They don't play by tolerant society's rules, so they they don't get tolerated.

The value is having a society that is tolerant of diversity of opinion.

Here is the opinion of the scientific consensus on transgender people, which is have been so for years, if not decades.

We have been harassed, bullied, doxxed, and banned for bringing those up in all major social media platforms. TERFs, white supremacists, misogynists, racists, have always gotten away in these platforms with punching down on leftists, African and Caribbean reparations activists, feminists, and queer people. They were protected by equally bigoted moderators under the guise of entitlement to their opinion, at the same time that all these other opinions are bashed and framed as "overstepping".

This is in line with what the EFF and Techdirt, which are both vocal First Amendment absolutists, have already said that what X and Facebook do now is in fact amplifying hate speech and effectively suppressing the free speech of gender and sexual minorities.

And this has been the situation for years, take for example the online harassment of feminists .

It is a deeply systemic bias, due to centrist indoctrination in broader society, that it is the leftist and inclusive spaces that are called out for lack of diversity for responding to harassment and bigotry, when the voices and lives of people are simply dominated and evacuated in major platforms without an iota of moderation and responsiveness to punch-down harassment.

Let alone that in the light of the most recent developments, which consolidates the above tendencies, makes the timing of the tolerance argument even more ironic and dishonest.

17

There is also the paradox of intolerance. If you let these people in, to respect their opinion, they will take over and deprive people of the right to live. They don’t play by tolerant society’s rules, so they they don’t get tolerated.

Do you not see the irony here of op being intolerant of sharing lemmy with people who do not share their viewpoint? You'll note from my other comments here that I'm explicitly not arguing for hate speech. IMO this thread was actually about the lack of moderate alternative views on Lemmy, not about encouraging extremist narratives to take over the federation.

What I am arguing for here is to drop the unhelpful us-versus-them narrative and to argue that Lemmy could well learn to tolerate a wider range of opinions. This is not to say extreme and intolerant views such as the ones you have described should be permitted.

-4
discuss.tchncs.de

Yes and for some topics thats valid, and for some it absolutely is not. Like this discussion isnt even about being tolerant about other viewpoints, its about a lack of other views being problematic, and i dont consider a lack of hateful bile to be a problem in any way. I also dont consider those hateful ideals to be worthy of tolerating. I asked you for an example of a specifically right wing viewpoint thats not false, is worthy of discussion, and not hateful, and you gave none, so what is the point youre trying to make? And why should we make an effort to platform more right wing views when they are basically all hateful?

9

If your goal is to solve society's problems, you have to listen to everyone, even people you disagree with, in order to identity the underlying problems.

And sometimes you have to read between the lines because they are not politically and economically literate. And unfortunately, that means people often latch onto ideas that sound good to them, but may or may not be a good idea in real life.

For example, some people may blame immigration for their problems. But that is not the real problem. That is just a scapegoat that the politicians use. The real problem is that they are struggling financially, and don't know how to fix it, most likely because someone is taking advantage of them and/or they don't have what they need to be successful.

If you fix their economic problems, and educate them on what the real problems are, they will realize that the immigrants were never the problem. This will reduce the tension and hate, and expose the propaganda for what it is.

But you can't change anyone's minds if you label them as enemies and refuse to listen to them. And you can't solve problems if you can't identify the underlying issues people are concerned with.

11
FlorisJanreply
kbin.melroy.org

I hope you're not being serious but if you are try to get out your bubble while you still can

-16
discuss.tchncs.de

I absolutely am. Im happy to discuss and debunk any right wing viewpoint thats brought up, but beyond that, having it repeated ad nauseum is in no way useful. Some opinions are not valid and don't deserve the space for argument beyond potentially educating people.

25
anusreply
lemmy.world

The idea that every left wing viewpoint is perfectly aligned with science and critical thought is over reaching

-2

I didn't say that, and im open to discussion on any viewpoint to an extent. Theres a lot of things i dont agree with even my most leftist friends about. But constantly giving voice to ideas that have been proven wrong, either scientifically or historically, is not helpful in any way. For some things there is a 'right' and 'wrong' answer. Gender science, economics, racial discrimination, the predominant roght wing ideas about these topics are just false, scientifically. And they shouldnt have to be disproven constantly in a public forum when that work has been done elsewhere.

22
discuss.tchncs.de

It's important though to not fall into the trap of creating false balance, i.e. giving the same weight to a false or harmful statement than to a truthful or good statement, in the name of "fairness" or "objectivity". Also, conservatives tend to shift to the right currently.

51
Dessalinesreply
lemmy.ml

This meme basically:

To OP's point tho, I think the fediverse is a lot more ideologically diverse than reddit or other corporate platforms. The fact that you can say something positive about the Palestinian resistance without getting banned, or say something positive about a country on the US-enemy list, is a testament to that diversity.

Sure, there are many servers on the fediverse that are anti-communist, and orientalist / western supremacist, and block leftist ones, copying reddit's moderation policy. But on the US-run corporate platforms(FB, reddit, twitter, bluesky), you aren't given any option: that's a non-negotiable default that you must accept. Here you can always join a server that's willing to federate with leftist ones, and is okay with ideological diversity, even if you don't consider yourself one.

34

This is one of the reasons why the US federal government wants to ban TikTok, a highly unpopular among the US general public. TikTok isn't moderated in ways that suit US ideologies and propaganda, which means more leftist content leaks through to the masses.

4
lemmy.ml

There appears to be a lack of “centrist”

“Progressive” liberals in fact the centrists—they're center-left at best—and there are plenty of them here.

right-wing voices (and I don’t mean extreme MAGA-type views, but rather more moderate conservative positions)

These people are liberals as well, but because they usually break Lemmy’s code of conduct regarding various bigotries, they get usually quickly the boot.

non-political

Everything social is political, and the fediverse is social media.

50

Given how likely right wing conservatives tends to spread misinformation and cite low quality sources, I honestly don't mind the lack of right wingers.

44
lemmy.eco.br

obligatory reminder that us-american domestic politics are so skewed to the right that what appears "moderate" in the usa is right to far-right anywhere else

your "liberals" are right-wing

your "conservatives" are right-wing

both are liberals

41
prolereply
lemmy.blahaj.zone

I would say that what is considered "liberal" in the US is more "center-right".

Your comment leaves no room for nuance, and anyone who has paid attention to US politics at all for the past 2+ decades knows that there is a massive gulf between how Democrats govern vs. Republicans. Anyone who suggests otherwise is full of shit.

I hate how it feels like I have to defend Democrats on this site, because they are pretty shit as a party, and yes they are liberal.

-2
lemmy.eco.br

democrats are enthusiastic supporters of US imperialism and neoliberalism. they're right wing. end of story

the only difference between republicans and democrats is that they sell US imperialism to different portions of the population. republicans are more honest about their intentions, but if there were only republicans, that would risk massive revolts from the more progressive-leaning portion of the population. this is why the democratic party exists: it allows the us govt to sell the same underlying project with a different face that's more appealing to the average progressive voter

edit: to really drive my point home ask yourself: what is the official stance of the democratic party regarding free and public healthcare, free and public education (including higher education), progressive taxation, public transportation, labor legislation (especially regarding maternity leave), etc? not what some more left-leaning factions of the party say, i mean the actual official party stance. because these are absolutely uncontroversial among the left-leaning parties worldwide

5
prolereply
lemmy.blahaj.zone

Yeah, this is the shit I'm talking about. You're clueless.

If you lived in the US, you would understand, on a very real, tangible level, the difference between living in a state with a Republican governor vs. one with a Democratic governor. Or for those in big cities, a Republican mayor vs. a Democratic mayor.

Any person older than 30 in the US that is not all of the following: white, cis-gendered, heterosexual, will tell you just how wrong you are.

You make leftists look bad, and I wish you'd stop. Use some critical thought. Recognize nuance. Don't let ideology cause you to ignore objective reality.

-1

"less" right wing is still right wing

i've been made aware of how miserable living in a red state is. but being not as rabidly misogynistic and racist as republicans doesn't make the dems "not right wing". implementing better domestic policies doesn't either. at the end of the day, both parties represent the interests of corporations, will implement austerity measures that widen your already massive wealth gap, and will make sure the us-american empire keeps the rest of the planet in a stranglehold


edit: as for you saying i'm ignoring reality, again, i'm aware republicans are worse for you, but i need you usians to truly grasp the reality that, unlike most other democracies, your two major parties are right-wing and ultimately uphold the same project. any right-wing politician for europe or latin america would feel at home in the democratic party

7
lemmy.ml

If you lived in the US, you would understand, on a very real, tangible level, the difference between living in a state with a Republican governor vs. one with a Democratic governor.

And if you lived outside the US, you would understand that it doesn't make a difference if the bombs leveling your city are painted red or blue, and the minor difference in domestic policy between the two factions of the genocidal empire really don't matter to the people you're exterminating.

4
jenniferemreply
my-place.social

@BrainInABox
@prole

The differences between the two are NOT minor, but I support your second point completely.

Or foreign policy families have been staggering, no matter who has occupied the White House.

0
lemmy.ml

For you the difference may not seem minor, but when your entire country has been leveled by American bombs, the slight difference in social issues that applies only to comfortable Americans who are not living in refugee camps being hunted by sniper drones seem basically negligible.

1

@BrainInABox
I get what you're saying. We have been very fortunate here, but that has been the limit of our lived experience, so to us, it is not minor. In the big picture, you are correct.

1
prolereply
lemmy.blahaj.zone

Yeah, it's not a minor difference. A fact that people are about to wake up to in a week or so...

0
lemmy.ml

Yeah, I know Americans have trouble believing that foreigners are people, but believe me: for us, the difference is negligible.

4

I know you love to get to make a snarky reply, but no.

You are in for a rude awakening.

-2

I’ve seen right wing liberals, left wing liberals, marxists, stalinists and anarchists just to name a few. If anything there is more diversity here than other platforms as it isn’t just various shades of liberal.

40

We already have people praising Liz Cheney.

You could say "I am noticing a distinct lack of Neo Nazis on Lemmy".

To which I say why change that.

38
lemm.ee

Conservative and/or right wing, authoritarian, reactionary (feel free to pick your favorite analogous label) views are ethically wrong and lack evidence to add a worthy perspective to discussions. Capitalism is a belief and should be discussed as other religions.

34
ladiciusreply
lemmy.world

lack evidence to add a worthy perspective

That's exactly the point. "Conservative" most of the time means rollback to segregation and discrimination whereas the only chance of humanity lies within compassion and cooperation.

27
lemm.ee

I think there are some conservative opinions that are worth discussing. For one example, I've seen conservatives talk frequently about protecting children from an increasingly secular world. Comparitvely, that topic rarely comes up in normal lemmy topics.

Truth be told, I generally am progressive on this, but I sometimes wish I could discuss this with someone whom I may disagree with, so I could better understand where I would stand

-4

Protecting them from what now? Exactly what are we protecting them from in a ‘secular world’?

3
Snickeboareply
lemmy.world

I think you provide the perfect example of what OP is talking about.

In my experience this kind of comments and “far left” views are the norm on Lemmy. I think that in this regard Reddit had (I have not been there since the API shutdown) a much more balanced and wide spectra of political views. Not to mention that everything wasn’t political there. Here I feel like everything takes a “far left”/Marxist turn.

To me, this homogenous political environment turns me off and is one of the primary factors behind me not really using Lemmy that much.

To be clear I do not think that your views should be silenced and whatnot. Just agreeing that this is indeed a “far left” echo chamber.

11
eldavireply
lemmy.ml

In my experience this kind of comments and “far left” views are the norm on Lemmy. I think that in this regard Reddit had (I have not been there since the API shutdown) a much more balanced and wide spectra of political views ...

redditors (like most americans) proved that they believe a genocide is acceptable political collateral damage and that facism is okay; that's fucked and not at all balanced in any way.

26
lemmy.world

Yeah. Why go through all the effort to cover up the true nature of your actions if your beliefs and views are so much more balanced. While the speech here may be more absolutist, I don't think other people who don't factor in these untruths or use them to make their points have much to add to the conversation. It's just talking points.

7

I just saw a revised death toll in Gaza. Lots of people have been downplaying this. This is only one example.

6
Snickeboareply
lemmy.world

I’m not talking about whether the content of an opinion is balanced or not. I’m talking about that if you take into consideration all the different views; are there just a few vs many, are the views leaning heavily in a specific direction (right/left), etc.

And you continue to prove the point that Lemmy has a “far left” overweight. I’ll remind you again that I’m not talking about whether I think you are right or wrong, just that it’s an echo chamber for opinions like this.

-2
eldavireply
lemmy.ml

And you continue to prove the point that Lemmy has a “far left” overweight. I’ll remind you again that I’m not talking about whether I think you are right or wrong, just that it’s an echo chamber for opinions like this.

genocide is never acceptable and facism is never okay; these are facts, not opinions.

12
Snickeboareply
lemmy.world

I never alluded to these being ok? I agree with you here

6
eldavireply
lemmy.ml

They're big parts of the American Overton window now; yet you called their consideration

a much more balanced and wide spectra of political views

11

Not sure what you mean to be honest. What do you mean by "yet you called their consideration"?

What I meant earlier was that the way that you express

redditors (like most americans) proved that they believe a genocide is acceptable political collateral damage and that facism is okay; that’s fucked and not at all balanced in any way.

is (in this case left?) misrepresentation what others (or most other) believe. I don't know if this is in bad faith or if its because of "echo chamber radicalization". I do have a hard time believing that "most americans" or "redditors" (as in most redditors?) approve of genocide or facism. They might have other/more nuanced ideas on some issues than you. But for the record I'm not American.

I do believe that you will be able to provide examples of crazy comments on some issues. But in my experience, when you leave the internet and talk to people in real life - most people are sane, moderate and do not hold far left/right opinions on most of the issues discussed like this on the internet.

0
lemmy.ml

To be clear I do not think that your views should be silenced and whatnot. Just agreeing that this is indeed a “far left” echo chamber.

We, just like you, have been bombarded incessantly from birth with the hegemonic bourgeois ideology. It is inescapable. Most people don’t even realize they’re soaking in it, because they’ve never been outside of it. For most people it’s just “common sense.” It’s literally impossible for us to escape to a “‘far left’ echo chamber.”

Who is really in an “echo chamber”: those who have investigated outside of our hegemonic liberal/capitalist/imperialist culture, or those who never have?

17

If a view isn't based on truth, it just simply doesn't matter. It's not a matter of silencing, which there is no need for

5

The phrase "are ethically wrong" is hilarious. According to whose code of ethics? How are their ethics more moral than someone else's set of ethics?

There's literally entire branches of philosophy dedicated to the concept of morals and the concepts of good and evil.

Edit: Also, to add on to this, something can be ethically right but morally wrong, or ethically wrong but morally right.

-3

Hearing from "both sides" and coming to some compromise/middle ground only works if the following is true:

  1. Both parties are acting in good faith.
  2. The viewpoints expressed are close enough that they don't require a total departure from one's current viewpoint.
  3. The disputed topic doesn't have a obvious or clear correct answer.

The problem is, at least in the US, none of these are true for right wingers and even many "centrists."

You cannot talk to somebody and try to find common ground if they don't believe in statistical studies by government agencies, they don't believe in scientific studies by major universities and research institutions, and don't care about the rights and protections for minority groups.

The older members of my family are almost all conservatives, MAGA supporters, and fundamentalist Christians.

They genuinely believe that Evolution is a myth and the Earth was created 6000 years ago. They believe that illegal immigrants are invading this country and that Democrats are secretly allowing them to. They don't believe humans have any effect on climate change. They don't think Covid was anything more than a common cold that the government used as an excuse to try to control people. They don't believe in vaccines.

I find Lemmy to be very refreshing. I get news from a diverse collection of Leftists sources. Anarchists, statists, weak socialists like the AOC/Bernie types, government studies, independent guerrilla journalists, Communists, Mutualists, Marxists, etc.

But I have no interest in further "diversifying" by adding right wing "sources."

Cookies can taste good with many different ingredients, but no cookie tastes good with horse poop.

32
lemmy.world

yeah, liberals are conservative scum lol.

liberals are literally on the left wing of the spectrum, but apparently that's not good enough for 'arbitrary decider of who's a leftist' here

-21
lemmy.ml

You have to be at least anti-capitalist to be a leftist. That's the bare minimum.

Lemmy liberals are centrists. They favor capitalism with regulations and social welfare.

22
lemmy.world

You have to be at least anti-capitalist to be a leftist.

oh I must have missed the "YOU MUST BE AT LEAST THIS ANARCHO-MARXIST TO RIDE THE LEFTIST LABEL" sign at the front of the line.

damn is this really how you think? are these really the thoughts that just bubble up in that grey matter?

way too much time on your hands if so

you're so fucking busy delineating who's not a good leftist that the conservatives are going to destroy you all and you'll be quibbling about who was a real one and who's faking being in the concentration camp.

-10
chlorokenreply
lemmy.ml

But literally, you do need to be anticapitalist to be a leftist.

Where did you learn your stance from? Its wild.

20

This is the result of a century of communist/socialist purges and of cold war propaganda in the US. Most Burgerstanians haven’t known their asses from their elbows politically for generations.

10
Frank Casareply
frank.casa

That's the problem with labels. They often mean different things to different people.

0

Yeah, there's the academic record and then there's random forum posters. Different meanings, sure: with one worth discarding.

2

These are well established political definitions, not something we just up and decided a few days ago. Political position along a left and right axis, defined in the context of the economic present, with a pro- or anti-capitalist stance on either side. "The Left" has more or less been defined by an anti-capitalism - pro-socialism stance for a long time, despite whatever labels some news outlets choose to use to demonize liberals and Democrats. They restrict definitions to the Overton window, just a sliver of the full political spectrum, which is firmly planted rightward, and promote the idea that the left side of the window is "The Left". It isn't. Many iberals and the democratic party are firmly pro-capitalist. It isn't that they are good or bad leftists, they just aren't leftists at all. We aren't too busy figuring this out, we've been clear with these definitions for forever.

12
lemmy.ml

The liberal wants to preserve some parts of the capitalist tradition while enacting some social reforms. That puts them in the center.

You want to talk about concentration camps? The US has the largest incarcerated population in the world, and it has my entire life, since Clinton introduced the Crime Bill. The prison population almost doubled from 1990 to 2000. That's liberalism.

11
Alteonreply
lemmy.world

Yeah, in the interest of not having a bloody, civil war, I'd rather try to correct the economic paradigm that we have rather than instill a new one that will have its own set of unique and terrible problems (for example, see nomenklatura).

The chaos that will arise from the transition will be deadly, terrifying, and profound. It is not something I wish my children to have to go through. So, yeah....of course I'd rather work to fix the system that we have.

-6

Okay, but that's why you aren't a leftist.

Personally, the reason I have an .ml account instead of an account on one of the farther left instances which aren't federated with .world is because I want to argue with people like you. I welcome the diversity of opinion between leftists and liberals, I deliberately expose myself to it. Liberals keep me sharp without being emotionally exhausting the way people farther to the right are.

13

liberals are literally on the left wing of the spectrum

They literally aren't

10
Glasgowreply
lemmy.ml

Liberals are auth right on the political compass.

Leftism is anti-capitalist.

2
lemmy.ml

The Political Compass is generally a terrible way to view politics, I wouldn't put any stock in it.

17
Glasgowreply
lemmy.ml

It’s an oversimplification and has its limitations but that’s often what’s needed to reach mass appeal and be useful in discourse.

-4
lemmy.ml

On the contrary, it makes little sense at all. Ideologies can't be put on a compass like that.

10
Glasgowreply
lemmy.ml

On the contrary, it’s is a useful heuristic, even if it’s not perfect. While ideologies are complex and multifaceted, it provides a framework to map tendencies. It simplifies ideologies, sure- but that’s precisely its value & the social/cultural dimension and is harder to map

-1

When you simplify ideology too much, you ceate more confusion, like elsewhere in the thread when you categorize Marxist means as auth left and ends as lib left, despite Marxism being consistent in means and ends. There are far more issues with it than it solves.

7

But that's just it - it's not a useful heuristic, it's a delusional framework, even more than the geocentric model was. We were mapping the planets onto that, but that didn't make it useful.

5
lemmy.world

Given that in the US leftist perspectives on anything are few and hard to come by, I welcome Lemmy's primarily leftist slant on things. Should one want to get a fascist or center/center right perspective, pretty much everything in the mass media in the US will provide that.

28
Solar Bearreply
slrpnk.net

Reddit is mildly left of center as a whole. It is not leftist. You do not find many people there who are genuinely anti-capitalist, which is a prerequisite for any flavor of leftism.

9
lemmy.ml

Americans talk Newspeak thanks to a century of socialist purges and red scares. Their “left” is so far right that the actual left is silenced, is outside the Overton window. In terms of political vocabulary, Americans don’t know their asses from their elbows.

9

@davel
@BlindWorks

Thank you! This is how I have felt, as an American, for a very long time!

The BIGGEST issue we have here, IMO, is APATHY. So many Americans "don't watch the news" or "didn't like to talk about politics" or can't handle anything being talking about the weather and other bland topics. I find it depressing and annoying.

4
lemmy.ml
  1. There appears to be a lack of “centrist”, non-political, or right-wing voices (and I don’t mean extreme MAGA-type views, but rather more moderate conservative positions).

I see plenty of them. They're just mostly on other instances to me (like your home instance).

Furthermore, while it's tempting to see the so-called 'left' and 'right' as equivalent mirrors needing to be balanced for diversity, the reality is far from it. After seeing Wolfballs in action (that instance died before the reddit API fiasco), I can tell you we don't need to be balanced out by 'white genocide' discussions and more open anti-semitism. I know that's not what you proposed, but it's to illustrate that sometimes there isn't value in arbitrary balancing the 'left' and 'right' on these websites.

is it a natural result of Lemmy’s community-driven nature?

It's also a result of Lemmy's history and appeal. When reddit went on sprees of deleting subreddits, the right-wing hate groups made their own reddit clones, anarchists typically went to Raddle, and when GenZedong and ChapoTrapHouse went down, they went to Lemmygrad.ml (as a result, it became the largest instance) and created Hexbear respectively. So there is a long history of larger communist communities from day one which was the status quo until the reddit API fiasco.

The Fediverse also tends to attract anarchists and other socialists by the appeal of its decentralized nature, along with a few right-libertarians who see it as an anti-censorship tool. So one could say there's a bias there.

How might we encourage more diverse political perspectives while still maintaining a respectful and inclusive environment?

That's tough, because you inherently limit which political perspectives you can encourage.

26

It is just an extension of the "Paradox of Tolerance."

It is not a paradox at all, it's just intolerance that doesn't deserve a platform.

3
lemmy.ml

Lemmy has always had the Communists and Anarchists, from what I understand. Liberals largely came during the Reddit fiascos. Overall, I'd say instances are becoming more homogenous, but I don't think that's a bad thing necessarily. I'd rather have more leftists and fewer liberals seeing liberals convert to leftists, IMO.

24
lemmy.ml

Liberals largely came during the Reddit fiascos

Even before there were several instances like beehaw or sopuli regularily coming out with shitlib takes (and they still are, some comments below in this thread there is a sopuli user alluding genocide denial and whitewashing nazism).

15
lemmy.ml

Yeah. Before there were mostly few people in threads. Abovementioned shitlibs were not very numerous too, just few recurring nicknames and few others getting banned and coming back under new nicks every few days.

9

Personally, I don't buy this echo chamber shit. Before social media, you choose your spaces and your company and did not have to put up with random jackasses butting into your conversations to tell you how much they hate gay people or whatever.

The abnormal thing is this expectation that we're all supposed to meet in the middle with any asshole at all times. I'm happy with a townhall meeting once in a while but I don't want to or need to put up with bigots and people who are otherwise socio-politically the opposite of me on a daily basis.

I want to be in the company of people that don't make me feel like shit and who I can see eye to eye with. That's not being closed minded or wanting an echo chamber, that's normal.

24

As a non-American the issue as I see it is that too much of Lemmy is dominated by Americans and therefore American politics. I scroll through and read a ton of comments about how monstrous and vile the right wing is, and that's just simply not true where I live. The popular American right is incredibly authoritarian and seeks to control all aspects of ones life. The right wing in my country is purely economic. You can debate capitalism vs communism I guess but no part of my countries right wants to remove the rights of women or the lgbt. Its all just a matter of where you live. And most people here live in the States.

23

For now. Most countries are realising how well this is working and following suit. The Tories in the UK used to be mostly sensible and fiscally conservative. Then last election cycle they pivoted to talking about the tofu eating wokerati and attacking trans people. Support for things like abortion or LGB is generally more established but they’re chipping away at that too.

8
sh.itjust.works

Why? My point wasn't that we should quarantine it. Just laying out the facts as I see them.

2

Sadly I see that shifting as billionaires in other countries see the success of American billionaires. Hoarders of money and power exploit society to their gain any way they can get away with. The orthodoxy and social norms of your country may keep their power grabs in check to date, but be vigilant. The resources and power of billionaires allows them to play the long game on whittling away at anything that stands in the way of their egomaniacal lust for more. I hope for all of our sakes, this billionaire undermining movement that is spreading can be beaten back. What’s happened in America was not organic. It was a strategy engineered by idealogical confederations of billionaires pooling resources.

4

Conservatism is generally a worthless ideology that makes the world worse, so I don't feel a desire to spend more time with it. We don't need to debate "what if women don't have rights", "what if gay stuff is illegal?", "what if you had to pay for health care so if you were poor you'd just die?" or whatever.

23

There is no such thing as a "moderate conservative" any more. IMO the difference has always been mainly, how mask off they were prepared to go. Trump has shown them that you can go fully mask off without any negative consequences.

22
lemmy.ml

As a leftist myself (communist)

Very, how do you do fellow kids energy from this comment.

I don't think I've ever interacted with a communist who would be upset about a lack of reactionaries in their spaces, they'd be relieved to have a place free of them and their ignorance and hate.

And the fact you think that "centrists" and "right-wing" are somehow not extremists (but this made up special category of MAGA which by the way is most conservatives in the US and in a lot of the world somehow is) tells me you are politely not really politically literate.

Liberals are reactionary enough in their excuse for genocide, you think for some reason we need space for not only them but the people who want to take away rights from trans people, who want to kill trans kids, who want to make women second class citizens, who are incredibly racist, war-mongering, anti-science, etc?

As much as I align with many of the views expressed here, I wonder if we’re missing out on valuable dialogue and perspective by not having a more diverse range of political opinions represented.

You can get that literally anywhere else offline or online, especially your home instance. You're not from a leftist instance but from the most reddit-brained, centrist neo-lib instance.

This is false equivalence, the idea that the left is too extreme and needs balancing with the right. Please just accurately identify your politics or don't bother mentioning them as we can easily guess them from a post like this.

21

The Alphabet Boys are tired of lurking in the shadows. They have Trump (and more) dead to rights on 10,000 times worse shit then what is public and they sit on their hands.

The intelligence community wants what is coming. Do not hesitate to judge them as they have already judged you.

Your Facebook profile is probably uploaded to some automated killing machine already for purging. Someone just needs to execute the program.

2

From your post it's pretty safe to assume that you're part of the lefties that are crying over meta dropping censorship against misinformation for community notes

want to take away rights from trans people, who want to kill trans kids, who want to make women second class citizens, who are incredibly racist, war-mongering, anti-science, etc?

Yet here you blatantly spread misinformation...

-2
lemmy.ml

Seems like lemmy.world already provides plenty of right wing perspectives, we really don't need me.

21

Modded, and federated/defederated. They intentionally defed from the Marxist dominated instances because they wanted to erase any real Marxist presence.

11
Valmondreply
lemmy.world

I'd say rightwing is inherently egoistic, far right is what you are talking about.

Both are tiresome when it comes to discussions, one is full of hate, the other lacks compassion.

So yes, what is there to discuss? What "viewpoint" is there to see?

3
Valmondreply
lemmy.world

Being egoistic or even egocentric isn't self care.

2
lathreply
lemmy.world

It is caring about oneself. Exclusively.

1
Valmondreply
lemmy.world

Like a banana is a fruit, but fruit isn't "a banana".

1

Sure. Banana is the favourite fruit, and all the others are set aside.

1
lemmy.ml

I think the problem is in the opposite direction. Society is too ideologically homogeneous in being against socialism. The major narratives are controlled by nation-states and corporations, social media are infested with political advertisement and propaganda.

So, as others say, I believe it is sorta uninformed and middle-of-the-road fallacy to find a corner of the internet where you can speak your mind without being harassed by white supremacist trolls, and say we need more diverse views.

Right wingers have (had) Parlel, Gap, TruthSocial, now they have X, and Facebook, where they were also dominating and harassing in the past. No leftists and/or genderqueer person would survive a day at these platforms.

But Lemmy being primarily/explicitly leftist is the problem, and you suddenly are alarmed for echo chambers. This is not quite fair, now is it.

As for Lemmy per se, I don't think it is too homogeneous. I debate centrists and liberals every other day. And recent discussions showed that the amount of latent transphobia in the site is shocking, with people knowing next to nothing apart from 4chan/MAGA talking points.

How can this happen after all these years of activism and outreach. It is because of the ecosystem of echo chambers in the broader communications and media landscape. This discourse never reached those people.

Considering it was the position of major medical and professional organizations, it shows that the pathology lies with the existing social media and broader media enterprizes, with a prominently selective messaging.

Do I need to say that this led to widespread science-denialism for which mainstream platforms are clearly to blame?

If your inquiry is honest, then the only explanation is that the propaganda apparatus works so well, that the (relative) absence of the dominating narratives makes you anxious that you entered an echo chamber, when in fact you probably have been in an echo chamber so far.

20
lemmy.ml

If your inquiry is honest

They claim to be communist but wants more centrists and rightwingers here. It's a clear clue they are not honest.

11
IronKrillreply
lemmy.ca

Is it so strange to entertain the thought of talking with people outside your bubble? Not everyone enjoys day after day of single-opinion threads and enjoy having well-intentioned discussions with other people. Political movements would never go anywhere if they never left a basement.

-3

I only know a single other Communist IRL and they're my fiancé. Existence forces me to grapple with liberalism and fascism on a daily basis, maybe an Anarchist here or there. It is only here that I can talk to comrades.

10

Bruh, i live in fucking Poland, literally everyone around is shitlib or fascist and any kind of socialist thought is tightly censored in non stop anticommunist onslaught in every possible media, so you can take your plurality posturing and shove it where the sun don't shine.

9
frank.casa

I find it interesting that some people are saying "the right is this" and "conservatives are that" and then siting horrible things most people would be opposed to. How would you know if you never talk to them and just assume what they think?

I think most people assume the extreme right is the entire right, just like most people assume the extreme left is the entire left. It's actually a spectrum. Or more accurately, a Nolan chart.

Most people I know are in the center, and they oppose racial segregation, oppose racism, oppose oppression, oppose monopolies, and oppose corrupt officials. But since they are not communists or socialists, some people on the left lump them in with the far right, which the center doesn't like either.

And if you attack the people in the center by falsely accusing them of being the right, all you are doing is alienating people who might agree with you on a lot of things.

19
Glasgowreply
lemmy.ml

I have spoken to them all, for years. In all shapes and sizes.

They are all driven by fear and tribe mentally. Reality does not matter to them only emotions.

I’m not a communist or socialist btw.

15
Clentreply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

As opposed to you because you are not tribal and never make emotional decisions.

Reducing people like this is itself an emotional defense mechanism. We are fallible to the things you describe. All political bubbles have people who make this same exact claim about all the other bubbles.

There intelligence in recognizing this. Neither you nor I are in the one true bubble.

7
Glasgowreply
lemmy.ml

I'm not tribal at all and non-conformist to a fault. Of course I make emotional decisions - but when presented with clear evidence I can adjust my views as neccessary. I love to be wrong, the entire concept of how right-wingers react to information is so foreign to me I've spent years trying to figure out if they're lying or are they actually believe it. Unfortunately it's the latter. Giving those eejits air-space only pushes the centrist NPCs who have the same inherent flaws in how they process information to the right.

-7
IronKrillreply
lemmy.ca

Listen to yourself speak and tweak a couple of words to make it a right winger saying it. Perhaps you might realise how similar you sound.

the entire concept of how liberals react to information is so foreign to me I've spent years trying to figure out if they're lying or are they actually believe it.

Sounds exactly like what I'd read on r/conservative.

3

Well yeah they’re right into projection but doesn’t make it not true does it?

Is the concept not foreign to you? I’m all ears if so please. How do you deny that your guy tried to steal the election when his own VP came out and said it. Ignoring the fact he done it all out in the open blatant af.

1
Frank Casareply
frank.casa

You probably have not talked to moderates much. They don't like talking about politics because they get attacked by both the left and the right. But they are the swing voters, and they oppose the hate they hear everyday.

-6
Glasgowreply
lemmy.ml

Moderate conservatives? You’re right they’re normally older techno phobes so I don’t. But I know they didn’t put up much resistance to trumps antics. And many were happy to sacrifice reality to own the libs.

I’ve seen the radicalisation of anti authoritarian spaces by the right wing hate machine in real time though. Ancaps in 2006 terms would be leftists today. Classic liberals with economic backgrounds jumping on the MAGA train after being fed the right fake news memes.

All subconsciously which is the worst thing about it.

8

My comment was about conservatives so wasn’t clear. Spoken to plenty of moderates.

2
piefed.jeena.net
  1. Yes I noticed this too
  2. It already is, which is a shame
  3. Yes it's a problem because even if you try to get a balanced amount of all the views in your Lemmy subscriptions it's not possible, at the same time bubbles radicalize people.
  4. Let discussions happen, don't delete and ban because you're against the view (as long as it's not continuously spamming)
  5. Benefit: You see people as humans even if they are wrong, Drawback: you need to sometimes change your mind in face of new evidence showing up, which it wouldn't if you stay in your bubble.

The thing which I really dislike with a bubble is that people inside of it get more and more radical and ban even their allies because they're not radical enough.

19

Not counting lemmygrad and hexbear most of lemmy instances is completely liberal, at best radical liberal. I seriously doubt your statement about being communist if you call for more centrism and think we need more rightwing info.

You want more rightwing? Go anywhere else in the internet, there's full of it everywhere. What is lacking everywhere else, is communist point of view.

18
lemmy.blahaj.zone

If I saw serious attempts anywhere from right-wingers to advocate for their views as an actual political philosophy I'd be more concerned by this. But we need spaces where people actually discuss how to build a better society, and simply because of that concern these spaces lean left. It's rare to find right-wingers who are even seriously interested in that question, except as a pretext to vent their unexamined prejudices and personality issues.

If, on internet forums, you push for everyone to have equal say even when their views are not well considered, everyone's energy gets used up arguing with the most offensive right-wing posters. I think it's a good thing to have spaces where that isn't how it goes. As for centrists, I think there's a place for engaging with them because there's more of a chance that they just haven't examined their views but can be brought to. But I'm not going to miss them if they're so put off by a left-leaning space that they won't participate, and I don't think every left space needs to spend its time arguing with liberals.

Frankly, my view of the right wing these days is that there's no particular need to treat a mishmash of selfishness, greed, lust for power, deceit, gullibility, ignorance, insecurity and hatred as if it's a political philosophy at all. Left versus right isn't a helpful picture. Serious vs unserious would be a better one. If someone has serious arguments for a right-wing position made in good faith, then they're not just wasting people's time. But that's not usually what you see, and I suspect it's because there's a lack of serious arguments to be made for it.

I don't miss the right-wing voices. For the most part they just dominate, disrupt and obstruct serious discussion. That said, it's important we don't forget how unrepresentative our online discussions are of society as a whole, and how little impact merely talking about them here has.

17

Yes, exactly this.

It’s rare to find right-wingers who are even seriously interested in that question, except as a pretext to vent their unexamined prejudices and personality issues.

Because those that actually are interested in that question end up moving to the left when they see the "answers" that the right has to offer.

7

Reason and Science has always a left leaning bias. Simply because Nature doesn't give a shit about individual feelings or if someone believes if homosexuality is wrong. Nature does it's thing an humans who accept and understand this are not left-leaning but normal.

Corporate Social Media is manipulated like hell to shift the bias. That's it.

15

There appears to be a lack of "centrist", non-political, or right-wing voices (and I don't mean extreme MAGA-type views, but rather more moderate conservative positions).

They hang out in /modlog.

15

I find circles around .world to be more liberal and not leftist. (Not that there aren't any on .world... Just leans that way)

There's not much in terms of right wing spaces but tbh I'm uh, completely fine with that.

15

We are doing fine. Don't overthink lemmy.

People go where they want, Block what they will. Share what they share.

What else do you need? We aren't driven by shareholders to infinitely grow. Instances/communities/users will come and go, but lemmy is forever. It's just going to get better from here till we get a "TikTok ban" from big brother. Enjoy the ride.

14
my-place.social

@Teknevra
I'm not a part of Lemmy, but I will say this: There are some people with whom reasonable dialog is just not possible. Speaking only for myself, I choose not to engage. That does not mean I'm not aware of what they are saying or thinking. It means that I am drawing a healthy boundary for myself.

Your feelings about it are valid. You should absolutely seek out more mixed spaces, if that is what you want to do.

Cheers!

13
lemmy.world

I feel like we have come to a point in time where the Internet in general is becoming more separated like this in general. I enjoy Lemmy because I get a lot of the other perspectives in my day to day work life, and I like coming to this place to read and engage with people who share my views and ideas on topics. 🤷🏼‍♀️ Maybe that is pretty close to an echo chamber, but it is what I am seeking after spending every work day with conservatives.

10

It is the definition of an echo chamber. If every thread/comment w/e not following the trend gets censored or w/e else, it's not a diverse website and more likely propaganda/echo chamber.

1

Yeah this mirrors my approach to it.

People can like Trump/Musk or dream of Marxism in practice. I am so far from both ideologies that I find it difficult to relate to either, and end up being called a traitor by the left and a triggered lib/loser by the right. Lemmy is in my experience quite left.

The political differences have become so extreme that I just avoid any debate at all and stick to the technical stuff and hobbies. My sanity is more important to me than trying to convince someone over the pond that they are wrong.

Honestly, I just try to live my life as the best person I can be. I’ve gotten to old to try to change anyone else. And I have had some great encounters here, so I am not going back to Reddit anytime soon.

Stay awesome, people!

2
frank.casa

I am an independent and politically nonbinary, but people like assuming, almost always incorrectly, what I am thinking. The people on the right think I am left, and the people on the left think I am right. Apparently it is all relative, and the attitude of "if you disagree with me, you must be evil" is way too prominent, both on the left and the right.

I like listening to a variety of viewpoints because I can learn something new about human nature, even if I disagree with their opinion. It allows me to spot patterns that others don't see.

It also allows me to better understand and respond to flawed thinking and dangerous ideas. For example, giving power to someone who is power-hungry is dangerous, no matter what propaganda they are spouting. And there are opportunists and snakes in the grass all over the political spectrum. Just because they say the right things does not mean they do the right things. People don't always like it when that is pointed out. They confuse the leader for the cause.

The problem with remaining in an information bubble surrounded by like-minded people is that you start assuming that everyone thinks like you, which is usually not true at all. Both the right and the left fall into this trap sometimes. And people who have not experienced other cultures also fall into this trap. It creates an unrealistic and inaccurate view of the world. It also results in a shock when they realize that people on the other side of the world or from a different background think completely differently than they do.

It is one of the reasons why the Democrats lost the election in the U.S. They assumed they were the majority because they surrounded themselves with people who agreed with them and they repeatedly blocked or canceled anyone who disagreed. As a result, they shifted further and further away from what the people wanted, abandoned the working class, embraced unpopular views, and then wondered why they lost the swing voters, thereby giving the election to their arch enemies.

Cultivating and remaining in an information bubble is like shooting yourself in the foot and blaming the other side. The more you isolate yourself, the less reach your ideas have, and the less influence you have over society.

To be frank, some people are actually hoping both the far left and the far right becomes increasingly isolationist. It would mean they disappear from the mainstream consciousness since they silence themselves by blocking anyone who disagrees with them. That way they talk to themselves instead of bothering the mainstream middle, who are the actual majority.

The fact is, you don't hear much from the people in the middle because they get attacked from both the right and the left, and most people don't like the drama. Instead, they just go to the ballot box and vote against the politicians they don't like.

In an idea world, we could talk about the issues and come up with some non-partisan solutions. But society has become so polarized, I am not sure that is even possible anymore.

12
lemmy.ml

This sounds like some kind of an enlightened centrist take.

Educate me though, can you briefly describe your political philosophy?

3
Frank Casareply
frank.casa

@mortemtyrannis It is pretty simple, really. Don't screw over other people.

So that means I am against big business, monopolies, unfair trade practices, surveillance capitalism, hoarding wealth, etc.

I am also against big government, corrupt officials, police brutality, law enforcement overreach, government surveillance, tyranny, and dictators.

I think we should have free speech, but at the same time, I don't think we should allow harassment, doxing, slander, libel, or intimidation.

I think that people should get paid fairly based on what they contribute. Contribute more, get paid more. I also think that there should be a safety net for people who are struggling.

I think that we should have health care reform, but I don't like the choices that are being presented. Option 1: big business and big health care. Option 2: a government monopoly on health care. There is a middle route where you get rid of both big government and big business in health care. It would require some fundamental changes on how we handle health care, however.

I think we need less big business and less big government, and more small cooperatives, small businesses, and small non-profits. Smaller entities means it is closer to the people and they can chose who they want to deal with. Regardless of whether it is private, non-profit, or government-run, if you only have 5 choices or less, you really don't have much of a choice at all. Because if you have less than 5 major players, they all start to collude to keep policies and practices in place that benefit them and not the consumers or taxpayers.

I can go on. I may be an independent and politically non-binary, but I do have principles.

1

This is everything I wanted to say and it's why I've started going back to reddit to get some different viewpoints. This echo chamber is intellectually unhealthy.

3

Lemmy is the definition of a left-wing echo chamber. We all see it and if you downvote me for pointing this out - you are lying to yourself.

12

This is such a strange take to me.

I was on the broader fediverse for a year or so before lemmy took off, and I got used to the very strong left leaning environment I found there, where compassion for your impact on the people around you was built in to the norms of many of the communities. I wasn't used to it, but I was so glad to have found it.

And then lemmy happened. And unlike the rest of the fediverse, which was largely populated by people escaping twitter because it had been taken over by a fascist, the lemmy population was largely people escaping reddit because they could no longer use 3rd party apps. And the difference in ideology between those two groups is night and day.

To me, the broader fediverse feels left wing and comfortable. Lemmy feels centrist, where half of my time as an admin is banning trolls and bigots spreading hate.

tl;dr - Your definition of leftist is not my definition of leftist.

12

I dunno. I'm fairly far left, and moderately radicalized, and I get plenty of pushback. And from both those further left, and those that are US left (which is more centric overall).

Yeah, you don't get as many right wingers, but they do exist, and they tend to be willing to speak up. On the less crazy instances, they don't even get shut down by admins/mods, though they'll get down voted all to hell.

But I can't say that lemmy as a whole is that echoey. It just leans more left than any other form of social media.

11
lemmy.world

You sure you’re a leftist? I see more leftism allowed to exist on Lemmy than other platforms, but the majority of it certainly leans neoliberal.

Try criticizing NATO or the Democrats in Lemmy communities. See how fast the powermods and groupthink kick in to put a stop to it.

But of course the rightwing stuff gets targeted, too. The mods here seem keen to mirror the narrow pro-neoliberal Reddit viewpoint of what is acceptable speech. Anything beyond that will result in a strike against the user or instance.

ETA: just got banned from another Lemmy.world community for pointing out the original NATO commanders were Nazis. There you have it.

11

Try criticizing NATO or the Democrats in Lemmy communities. See how fast the powermods and groupthink kick in to put a stop to it.

That's on lemmy.world and lemm.ee

lemmy.ml and a few others are more pro-left

9

Discussions often feel like they're happening within an ideological bubble.

While this can be true for some communities, I find that users here do still engage with other viewpoints when the discussions are in good faith.

I think the reason why a lot of users lean in a certain political direction is because of

  • the origins of Lemmy
  • users that choose to leave the older platforms may have done so for social / political reasons
  • threadiverse is still relatively small

Do you think Lemmy is at risk of becoming an echo chamber for leftist views, a sort of Truth Social, Parler, Gab, etc., esque platform, but for Leftists?

I feel like we're getting more politically diverse over time. It's only a risk if we force a certain political leaning through moderation.

Is this a problem we should be concerned about, or is it a natural result of Lemmy's community-driven nature?

Worth keeping an eye on to see how it changes over time

How might we encourage more diverse political perspectives while still maintaining a respectful and inclusive environment?

Mainly moderation. If a community or space is intended for a particular group, it's perfectly fine to moderate how you see fit. If it is meant to be a general space, try to limit political biases when moderating and focus on bad faith comments.

If a post/comment was in good faith, it's more effective to let someone explain why it is wrong rather than removing it. Chances are that others can learn from the explanation (or that they were correct to begin with, and you'll learn something)

What are the potential benefits and drawbacks of having a more politically diverse user base on Lemmy?

The benefits are easy, I can't think of many drawbacks. Maybe:

  • More people = higher moderation costs (which can be dealt with by having bigger teams)
  • More drama (we have drama already)
11

Using Lemmy requires some modicum of understanding in technology. Most conservatives I've encountered tend to be technology-ignorant at best, and technophobic at worst. You don't see as many differing political views on Lemmy cause some/most conservatives are too inept at technology or can't be bothered to figure it out.

Reddit was just easier to get into, and as much as I personally like Lemmy, it's a hard sell to some from the outset. If the signup could be simplified (which I understand federation and why it can't be that easy), we could see an influx of more outdated viewpoints on the platform.

I also agree with others who have stated that most "conservative" philosophy involves denying rights to those who have only recently (last 50 years or so) been afforded rights equal to their own. I'm also growing increasingly suspicious of how much lead was actually used in the products consumed by boomers and some Gen-x before its use was known and most of it banned or removed from products. It seems too many in their late 40+ are going from normal human being with empathy towards others to RAGING MAGA CONSPIRACIST, seemingly overnight.

11
lemmy.ml

There are plenty of people on the fediverse that are clearly free and independent thinkers - as in not operating from inside a bubble where they get fed opinions and views from others and them regurgitating those views ad nauseam. On Lemmy, I see a lot of curiosity and a lot of people who were probably censored or effectively buried by downvotes on other platforms, despite their good faith and interesting (and sometimes radical) perspectives.

Discussion flows well, there's less focus on upvotes/downvotes and there is no karma. There doesn't seem to be a tradition of dog-piling people who wrong-think according to the group consensus (or whatever neoliberal narrative is prevailing) as there is on Reddit. Moderation is much less heavy-handed and there are no shadowbans/comments that don't show up for others (but only for yourself). There are significantly less bots and almost zero astroturfed content, as well.

Worry less about the labels, I say. If you want mainstream or conservative opinions, it's very easy to seek them out - the internet is full of those perspectives. If you're curious, you could play devil's advocate and discuss current events or other hot topics from a mainstream perspective and ask others why they think differently to better understand the userbase on the fediverse and how things generally go down here. I'm sure plenty of people would be happy to weigh the pros and cons of different viewpoints and perspectives and entertain a discussion about certain issues in good faith.

Not everybody is filtering everything out from a polarized lens and is focused on being an absolutist or purist with their preferred ideology.

10
IronKrillreply
lemmy.ca

There doesn't seem to be a tradition of dog-piling people who wrong-think according to the group consensus

I think I've been in different threads then, because most posts that aren't the majority opinion around here gets heavily discouraged by downvotes and/or replies.

3

I'll keep an eye out. I have been using this website moderately for nearly a year. I'm sorry your experience has been different - not discounting you.

1
lemmy.world

Go through my comment history and you'll see that the dog-piling on people with wrong think very much exists

-2
Michaelreply
lemmy.ml

I see that you frequently employ laughing in discussion, that you are pretty confused about different ideologies (such as seeing communism as being inherently authoritarian), and that you are frequently sarcastic and dismissive to others. You consider anybody suggesting change outside of capitalist philosophy as radical and you mock others for blaming capitalism for their problems. I apologize if I'm mischaracterizing you, I quickly skimmed a few pages.

Be respectful, debate in good faith, perhaps stop typing your laughs and other perceivably rude remarks if you don't want backlash. Or just do you - you are allowed to have gripes with various systems and ideologies and express them and discuss them with others.

Pay less attention to the downvotes. The downvotes don't hide your comment as on Reddit. There is also no collapsing of comments done by mods. Myself, I'm personally not a fan of the upvote/downvote systems and if I continue using this service I'm likely going to zap the upvotes/downvotes and all vote counters with uBlock Origin (as I don't participate in voting anyway).

4
lemmy.world

I feel like you picked out those examples while ignoring the ones where i have acted in good faith

0
Michaelreply
lemmy.ml

I did see those examples and of course I commend you for those and empathize with you. I feel it's best to just not engage with very polarizing topics, and from my experience, changing people's minds is very difficult if they are firm in their position and feel very strongly about a topic - even if your arguments are sound. If you think or feel differently than the consensus and feel strongly enough to talk about such subjects, just calmly eat the downvotes in such topics as you did. I promise you'll be stronger for it.

Listen, I was just trying to explain why some of the downvotes might be happening generally and I'm certainly not attacking you or against you. You're free to see things however you'd like and hold whatever views you like. Again, if it were my choice votes wouldn't appear at all.

I just know people are very sensitive to tone, and I understand that it's difficult to always be on your best behavior when people don't give you the respect you deserve, but I assure you there's a balancing act where you can not be a doormat and also assert yourself.

2

I respect your nuanced takes. I wish there were more on the fediverse with your mindset and calm approach to conversation.

-1

I wish lemmy had more niche interest groups, like marvel champions card game. Then there'd be something to talk about that isn't how we should force others to give a percetage of their earnings to the goxernment.

9
lemmy.world

Election time was so irritating, Lemmy basically reigned in Harris as the next messiah; I had to end up blocking political keywords to make it usable. Kamala Harris is an absolute joke and the DNC is an even bigger joke. I remember seeing one post where someone basically claimed she has a spotless political career and I'm just thinking, 😮‍💨, really?

The problem with left leaning individuals on the internet is we have a lot of drive and conviction behind our ideas which is a good thing, but that should translate into real life activism or doing something that will combat the current political system and promote change. But we are beaten down since that's basically a total pipe dream, we realize what the problem is and feel powerless to fix it. What's

Now, whats a good way to regain some of the power over your "opponents"? Silence their opinion, whether that be outright censorship or in other ways that are antithetical to getting the point across.

The American political system has us fighting amongst one another to keep people distracted from who is really fucking everyone up the ass daily. And it continues to work. We need to stop this petty squabbling and use all this wasted energy on something useful that could actually bring us together, like maybe instead of just browsing social media all day, you could go out in to the real world.

I am left-leaning and live in a predominantly conservative area. Very red. When I go out, people usually don't just randomly talk about Trump all day, that's just not reality. Most people dont make their political views their entire personality. I hear way more about Trump from social media than I am ever do from people in real life. And I assure you, I don't seek it out.

You have way more in common with the other side than you realize. Social media allows the worst aspects of peoples personality to come out since you don't have to look at a human being in front of you that has feelings, goals, beliefs, dreams, et al. just like you do. Have some god damn compassion and maybe try to understand why people on the other side have come to the conclusions they have, instead of throwing the baby out with the bath water.

9

Election time was so irritating, Lemmy basically reigned in Harris as the next messiah

You must have been using a different site than me. My experience was the opposite. Just a flood of bullshit to convince people not to vote for her (or not to vote).

5
GaMEChldreply
lemmy.world

I concur. I got downvoted just for pointing out the left has an issue courting young male voters. I'm so sick of my own party.

4

Appreciate ya, and agreed there too. Like UltraGiGaGigantic said, it's unfortunately not a party for the people. Neither are, really. Something American Democrats should consider is dropping the whole "vote Blue no matter who" kind of mentality. The huge base of people with that are part of the reason the DNC is able to maintain status quo and not have to actually do anything people want. If a large enough group of people were able to get together and agree on shit for once, a third-party or independent candidate might be possible. But the parties are basically treated like sports teams. Like, you're either team A or team B and theres no other option. except it's just a game at the end of the day. The system is set up to continue to enforce the two-party dichotomy, unfortunately.

2

@ronflex said:

The problem with left leaning individuals on the internet is we have a lot of drive and conviction behind our ideas which is a good thing, but that should translate into real life activism or doing something that will combat the current political system and promote change. But we are beaten down since that’s basically a total pipe dream, we realize what the problem is and feel powerless to fix it.

In many ways, that's what they want you to believe: that you have no hope to change things, so most people never try. That leaves the powers-that-be in charge.

But the reality is that people have the power to transform the country, and it does not have to be through the government. For example, if you are socialist or communist, you can establish your own communes, cooperatives, and employee-owned enterprises yourself, and it is totally legal! And, there are plenty of them already in existence.

People like to complain that someone else should fix their country, but the reality is, they can do it themselves, even when they have no political power whatsoever. But it takes hard work, and that is something most people aren't willing to do.

1

Conservatives can quite frankly go somewhere else.

Their policies are terrible and the only redeeming qualities of most countries we live in are socialist.

Lemmy should reflect the actual political spectrum which is (IMO) Social Democrats on the far right and Tankies on the far left.

8
lemmy.ml

I have noticed this trend. On the one hand, "Truth has a liberal bias" has always been true. If a community is geared towards truth and evidence, like as not it will lean left. There is copious evidence for this, for any random topic.

On the other hand, it has resulted in a lot of "I downvote complexity" behavior, which is, in my view, problematic. It is very easy to take stances of ideological purity online, and behave as if any recognition of greater complexity is EVIL!!1! I see this again and again. This is a way to make your ideological movement irrelevant and unworkable.

As much as folks decry the rigor of the MAGA right, where fealty to Trump is the only virtue, the Progressive left exhibits the exact same rigor, the exact same intolerance for deviation from its allies. Both Progressives and MAGAts see this as a virtue, but it very much is not: it locks you into a worldview that eliminates important complexity and any ability to see things from alternate perspectives. If you have a belief that your perspective is the only correct one, then the vast majority of the time, you're wrong.

8
Floonreply
lemmy.ml

There is absolutely nothing I said that says I'm a centrist. You're an example of the problem.

0

Yup. Proglib? right of center. Anything that doesn't label itself as LEFTIST is hard right according to them.

0
lemmy.ml

One thing I've found in life is that extremists of any ilk have more in common than differences, they just wave different colored flags.

-3
lemmy.ml

As a leftist myself (communist), I generally enjoy the content and discussions on Lemmy.

8
__Lost__reply
lemmy.dbzer0.com

This post is a great example of what OP is talking about. OP gave no political opinion on anything and you are calling them out for not being a real leftist?

-1

I have yet to hear anyone irl that identifies as left that actually wants to hear what the right has to say.

Right now it's all hate and bigotry. Which has no place in society as far as I'm concerned.

The only people I've seen concerned with people Hering out the right, are people on the right. "Centrists" are just right wing sympathizers.

So yes, I don't think they're actually left leaning.

I agree with the comment your replying to. It's very fellow kids. It's not how most people on the left talk.

Note: not the person you replied to.

10
lemmy.world

I don't understand this thought process. If the far left is preaching facts and kindness, and the other side is literally Nazies we need more left homogeneous thinking. We need to get educated and organized about the issues facing humanity. When the far left starts to be anti science and facts then you can begin to worry.

7

There's a lot of stuff written on this topic, but I haven't seen this mentioned yet: there are conservative instances on Lemmy, as a platform. Most of them are widely defederated, not necessarily for the views of the majority (though in some cases, yes), but because of asshats deliberately causing trouble.

Unfortunately, this is also a product of a wider shift in discourse by the right (understood in a North American context), which appeals mostly to edgelords rather than the (rapidly shrinking, already shrunk to the point of irrelevance/non-existence one could argue) thinking, at least ostensibly humanistic conservative.

There's self-selection in action here. Which makes sense, even if I also find it troubling (there are people who can be reasoned with drowned out by Nazi assholes, who are willing to hear people out on the not-Nazi stuff, give positive reinforcement and with it a home to get radicalized).

I don't have a good answer, and if I did I'd probably be up for a Nobel Prize given how wide and damaging the problem is. It ain't just here - it's pretty much anywhere anyone expresses any idea. I just happen to like this side of the Threadiverse much more, so it's where I hang out.

Only real hope is meatspace, imo. And even then, not everyone has the privilege to engage this way in meatspace without a direct risk to their personal safety (see POC, our trans brothers and sisters, LGTBQ+ folks, etc.).

7

so you're suggesting, what, exactly?

say I'd observed this trend as well, and agreed there was a risk (I don't but let's follow your chain of thinking) - what then?

Because I'm sure there's a desire for conservatives to have alternatives to reddit, but I as they can federate their own instances and have damn near free reign over whatever communities they want to create, I don't really understand what's to be gained from any actions that might be taken. We won't convince them it's a conservative haven, and that's genuinely what they want, a safe space where no one questions their conservatism.

so what is it you're thinking?

7

Someone asked this same question a while ago related to also Linux users present.

Basically seems to come down to techies being mostly left winged more frequently which makes up the vasg majority of Lemmy.

I don't miss the global echo and it's kinda nice to read civil discussions or talks.

Though i dont really focus too much on the political topic or consider people such to make it my concern when I read.

Just generally enjoy the good talks, advice and things like I remember how the internet started when it also had 0 political interest.

7

My instance has conservative and anti-leftist communities. They're more the personal playgrounds of a few people with humiliation and persecution fetishes though.

7

Participating in this thread had left me feeling like lemmy is much more of an echo chamber than what I thought before.

I like being disagreed with on occasion, but don't feel like anyone really listened here. That is very internet but also pretty concerning.

6

There are many posts preaching for the choir, but I wouldn't call it an echo chamber. It's more like a dead sound chamber where the ideas dies in agreement. It doesn't bounce off the walls or resonate. It's already there so no answer is required.

Lemmy would benefit from more users playing the devil's lawyer, but I think it's too small for anyone to use their main profile for that, and alt-accounts would quickly get blocked or banned.

Actual users with opposing views wouldn't be of much help. Politics isn't very nuanced these days. It's not red or blue, left or right or whatever. It's polarized into a new duality: Those that give a shit and those who are proud idiots. Lemmy is on the good side of this and will not benefit from being more accepting of idiots.

6

Yeah, it's not necessarily bad but it affects my point of view

Some might deny it, some might agree but decide it's for the best and apparently, others will just denote the least left of the leftists as conservative scum

5

I think this is the case, yes. From my pov the technical ability to block others and defederate leads to this left leaning trend. This is the only place I know that is really left leaning.

But the important part here is: the distinction between left and right is arbitrary. There is no left and right. There are certain beliefs and ideas which usually get attributed towards left or right.

The idea of freedom - in most of the world - isnt really left or right, or at least used to be.

Especially the fascist turn of the us, the fascist turn of germany and others are a sign of the world turning, not lemmy.

Because freedom, flow of ideas and identity are still typical topics on lemmy. Same as they used to be. I think the right wing nuts just left since they are more welcome on xitter and fascbook.

Is that good for critical discourse? No. Can we change it? No idea. Should we change it? No idea.

4
  1. Yes

  2. Yes

  3. Yes

  • Yes

  • Yes

  • Maybe; yes

  • It's a mindset thing. The more you interact with others positively while disagreeing, the better things will get. This only applies to reasonable disagreements.

  • People will learn more, but people will be wrong more. Unchecked political diversity drives away normal takes. No political diversity makes people afraid to voice disagreement.

4

We shouldn't be encouraging or squelching any political diversity whatsoever, we should be honing in more and more on how things actually are in the world, and the effects things are likely to have, regardless of who it pisses off or pleases.

3

I don't think so, there is a lot of very different opinions but all debatables. The only thing which, at least in the instances in my Timeline, are far right wing or faschist users.

3

I'm interested in this, i left reddit due to that, if it's just a reddit 2.0 i'm better getting off. So far it looks samey.

2

The size of my block list tells me there are plenty of right-wing voices on the platform. No everyone on that list is right-wing, but I'm fairly certain a majority of them are.

2

I have been saying a number of times over the course of my time here, that I think the "echo chamber"-ness of Lemmy is by design.

Each instance is moderated by a different team of people who run their server under a different philosophy. You can see clearly in this thread many from the lemmy.ml instance express mild disdain for "liberals", whereas other instances like lemmy.world and lemm.ee don't hold such animosity to that collective extent, but admins hold other expectations for what should be the norm. The way I view the Fediverse is that it's a collection of echo chambers, which within them help foster discussion between like-minded individuals. However these are networked with each other so you can wander outside that bubble to other instances when you feel like it. You also have control to block groups and instances you don't vibe with.

I know some instance moderation policies remove posts and comments that go far against the grain, but in other instances, unpopular takes just get super downvoted but left for people to see.

2

Wait you're saying that calling people nazis if they have a different viewpoint than you doesn't foster diversity? Who would have thought.

2
lemmy.ml

like bluesky is rightist , lemmy may be leftist . it also depends on the server , left has blocked right and vice versa . try to find a right one

1
lemmy.ml

Liberalism as an economic ideology. It seems fairly progressive socially.

3

I’ll offer this thought…

When I used to discuss politics with someone who viewed policy from the perspective of a different political party say 25-30 years ago, I would say 90-95% of what we wanted to see happen in the country was exactly the same. The differences were in how we wanted to get there.

Unfortunately, today I don’t think that the views align much any more. The views have diverged, and at least on the right, they have become extreme to the point of openly courting fascism, government capture by the oligarchy, and the masses supporting this don’t care about the consequences so long as they think they have a punitive moral victory over their opponents. The left isn’t really the left anymore, and I’m not sure what they want for the country. I don’t think they know either. They seem more interested in inclusivity than they do in actually making economic policy benefitting anyone under the upper middle class level.

All that said, I have yet to encounter one single instance of a conservative view on lemmy that wasn’t radical and antagonistic. I have also encountered far left views that were also radical and antagonistic. Far more hard left views than right, perhaps because there are so many hard left views the right stays away.

I don’t have the answer to what would increase the breadth of political content in Lemmy discussions, but the highly polarized and emotional views of politics along with internet anonymity isn’t really a recipe for balanced discussion. We haven’t even touched on organized propaganda deliberately pushing inflammatory posts and lies that incite reactionary and extreme views in return.

1

'Openly courting fascism' is a bit of an understatement, tbh. Elon Musk did a sieg heil and Trump wants to deport minorities. Can't get clearer than that.

0
lemmy.world

I think a lot of the responses you're getting (and their upvotes) are pretty good reflections of the problem you're addressing.

I imagine the user base is a bit more diverse than the comments etc let on. It is just exhausting to even try to explain a conservative perspective viewpoint t here so I think a lot of folks just keep their heads down on anything political.

While a lot of folks have zero interest in venturing outside of their ideological comfort zones, I wonder if there sre enough of us that we could make some /community work. There were a few on reddit that were private or super tightly moderated that were pretty interesting for stuff like that...

1
Omegareply
discuss.online

I'm not sure if there are any socially rightwing people in Lemmy (they would have to be very accepting of things they hate to remain) but there are definitely moderates in the economic stance

Even then, it's only 10% v. 90% from what I've seen, most are fully against private establishments within generally government ran departments

Even if someone did it, it would take a lot of people to move there and for what? I definitely wouldn't go, and I don't really care my opinions about the economy is hated

1

I'm saying moderates instead of rightwing because fuck you if you want vital government departments privatised (health, electric grid, rail, education, news)

1
aussie.zone

I don't consider myself leftist or rightist. I flip both ways on different issues and the middle on other things.

How ever Lemmy is becoming less tolerant of jokes and any view that doesn't line up with a moderator's view on the world.

It took a long time for me to get a ban but it's happened a couple times now.

Admittedly they're from .ml

Though some more left leaning communities have gone full on dog like as though it's Reddit

0
lemmy.ml

Moderators shouldn't be allowed to post to their own groups. How do you question a post by a mod without getting deleted/banned?

0
sopuli.xyz

I’m kind of surprised to see a post like this here, reference most of the many comments. In my experience online discussion trends towards radicalism and it’s not an ideal forum (ha) for reasonable political discussions; for example it’s very simple to demonize something, and with minimal penalty. One thing I can tell you is that there’s plenty of extremism here, and my feed is even spec’d towards memes and to avoid politics. The concentration is aggressive enough that these other perspectives you’re looking for are quickly savaged and oftentimes only expressed by people who aren’t smart in picking their fights and it shows in their viewpoints too. No idea how one would address that, like I said I think online forums are probably not the right tool for this sort of thing. Idk man, I just want my memes and hobby info without watching people seethe about American politics and wish for the murder of rich people in almost every community, political or not

-1

No idea how one would address that

Crush them with the bipartisan police state of course!

You seem sad that others are voicing their struggles to survive. A choice you personally make by not blocking people that voice their experiences with capitalism.

Block them. Ignore their pleading into the void. All is well. Nothing to see here. Move along. Pay your rent. Pay your health insurance premium. Invest in the stock market. Pickup this can.

5

There is the same kind of special snowflake attitude on here that ruined Reddit. You people only want to have your exclusive social bubble where you can sniff each other's farts. I'm not interested in that.

-2
lemmy.ml

There appears to be a lack of "centrist", non-political, or right-wing voices (and I don't mean extreme MAGA-type views, but rather more moderate conservative positions).

TBF, they don't exist.

They're might be some that on appearance hold reasonable views that are considered centrist /moderate conservative but if their privilege is questioned or their fragile egos get scuffed, they always and invariably go full on far right.

Their moderate views are just a veneer that are held to appear as such and never stand up to pressure.

-2

I’m not in the US so that’s your first fuck up.

Secondly, the misused ‘they’re’ was me not proofreading autocorrect too closely while I was on the train this morning.

You are an insufferable elitist bore.

1
prolereply
lemmy.blahaj.zone

I'm curious as to how their comment was "America-centric"? It seems as though it applies universally. Bad ideas are bad ideas, it doesn't matter what continent it happens on.

0

That's them being an elitist prick, full of English exceptionalism.

You could look through their previous comments and probably find that they invariably wear the badge of "political moderate" but their world view based around their superiority seeps through eventually.

2

lol posting this on the most notoriously censored instance, on a platform intentionally removed from the fediverse for this very reason.

Echo chambers are the flavour of lemmy. Think wrong is quickly censored.

-2
lemm.ee

Reading this thread, i think lemmy has a real problem. There sre a few comments that appear centrist or left-leaning, but the majority of comments are extremely left.

I'm not asking for neo-nazis or far right, just more centrist opinions like in this thread

-3
lemmy.ml

Why do we need more centrist opinions? Why is it a problem to have leftists?

9
lemmy.ml

All ideas within the centrist sphere have already been considered and mostly discarded by Leftists. You may have had a point if this was a centrist dominated space.

6

I disagree. Leftist ideas are only "uncharted" in some areas, in most of the world leftist ideas are more common or dominant.

6

for what is essentially uncharted territory.

Neoliberalism has been very well explored for the last 45 years and has failed. It is a dead ideeology that needs to be assigned to the dustbin of history as a terribly shit idea.

1

I'm far left wing, but it's my philosophy, it don't exclude the respect and tolerance to others (to certain limits). This is what is really important, a unique truth don't exist.

4

This place def needs more centrists. Too many libs sucking themselves (and each other) off. Not more MAGA though. Those guys are just wrong

-6
lemmy.ml

There is enough variance between and within authleft and libleft.

‘Centrist’ and right wing voices belong in the gulag.

-7
lemmy.ml

The GULAGs were not "death camps." The misconception of them being as such largely stems from WWII, when the Nazis stormed the Ukranian SSR and in taking it cut off the bulk of food production from the rest of the USSR. This led to prisoners getting less food than citizens, and many starving to death. Outside of wartime, prisons in the GULAG system were not especially deadly. Consider reading Russian Justice to learn more.

Secondly, fascism and Communism are polar opposites and in no way comparable. I recommend reading Blackshirts and Reds to read a critical overview of the USSR and how fascism and Communism are entirely antagonistic, and served different classes.

7
lemmy.ml

the Nazis stormed the Ukranian SSR and in taking it cut off the bulk of food production from the rest of the USSR. This led to prisoners getting less food than citizens, and many starving to death.

Not fun fact: at the same time nazis were murdering so many people in USSR that comparing to the gulags: USSR lost nearly 14% of population and the average gulag mortality rate during the war was probably around 10%. Meaning being in the gulag was statistically safer than being outside during the war (statistically because for example people in Siberia were safe from nazis while Belarussian SSR lost one third of entire population).

Also yet another comparison, in Russian Empire before revolution katorga (forced labour) had usually over 40% mortality.

4
lemmy.ml

That wasn't a "fun" fact at all, comrade... but thank you for sharing. It's important.

4

Where are you getting "1 in 5?" That number far exceeds any historian's numbers for incarceration rates for Soviet prisons by a factor of 10 for the highest estimates, both while the GULAG administration existed and the post-GULAG system.

Secondly, again, Communism and fascism are in no way comparable. Communism ultimately served the Proletariat, who enjoyed free healthcare, education, a doubling of life expectancy, over tripling of literacy rates to near 100% (higher than the US and Western Europe), ended famine, democratized the economy, and more. Fascism on the other hand developed systems of industrialized murder, destroyed working class organization, and found vast riches for the Bourgeoisie. They are entirely incomparable, and to do so is actually fascist apologia. Equating the two originated as a form of intentional holocaust minimization, a form of genocide denial.

No, no Communist system has been perfect, but to compare them to the Nazis is clearly wrong to the highest order. Again, read Blackshirts and Reds, the entire purpose is to debunk such a notion. As for Soviet prisons, read Russian Justice.

7
Frank Casareply
frank.casa

No, instead of putting them to death, they worked them to death. If they survived, they might get their freedom... and be watched by the KGB for the rest of their lives.

Also, to be fair, you have to look at specific time periods in Soviet and Russian history. Under some leaders, it was a very harsh prison sentence. Under other leaders, it was much worse.

-2
lemmy.ml

It must be so nice being an anti-communist, you can just say what ever made up bullshit comes into your head and expect people to believe you.

3
loves.tech

It is not made up. Read about Stalin. A lot of things happened when he was in power. And a lot of things changed after he was no longer in power.

-2