Spyke
piefed.social

The only thing more important than "do nothing wrong" is to loudly correct those who are doing "almost right" and "in the right direction."

106

I think it's a tossup between "loudly correct" and "vilify as a disappointing libshit."

33

I had an interaction once where I thought I used double quotes around a word to imply something obvious related to the posted article. A random person got mad at me and claimed I knew nothing about solidarity.

I felt insulted, they didn't know my life experiences up to that point. I chose to ignore my feelings and pressed them to teach my why I was so wrong. They eventually disappeared from replies because they had nothing behind that image of righteousness. Rare win but I'll take it.

If someone put themselves in harms way to punch an authoritarian follower in the face in my defence and also uses slurs I could find offensive to myself, that's not my enemy. That's someone awesome who could use a little more education. Later. When the current situation isn't so wild.

Words are just words. That's not as effective as punching a fascist in face.

49

We are really lacking in fascist faces punched these days, no one can have a civil conversation without them screeching and throwing shit

13
reddthat.com

I haved discussions with others here where its people are just not happy with baby steps and want full change right away. Problem is we need to make more friends not enemies with each other.

31
lemmy.world

I've started to make a habit on the internet to make amends and give grace to people who get upset in the comments as fast as possible. Textual online spaces are seemingly quite prone to disagreement, so it's a huge help just to mindfully counteract that tendency.

19
Spacehooksreply
reddthat.com

Well easy for you my brave little Hitachi wand! Who can stay angry at you!

6
lemmy.world

Ball big. Need lots of hands. Take long time move. Come. Help. Roll big ball with us.

10

Also, we don't actually know which way we need to roll it. Some people have strong ideas, other understand the vague direction but there's lots of invisible obstacles strewn across the landscape, and whenever we hit one there are a hundred different people with a thousand different explanations about what the fuck just happened.

4
Grimyreply
lemmy.world

It bothers me that I see genocide trivialize so often, like implying it's a full step that needs to wait. The problem is that they would rather take the steps that help Israel commit heinous acts then start with small steps that benefit their constituents.

Stopping the sale of weapons to a apartheid state committing genocide and condemning them is now seen as too much? I can't expect anything good to come from them if that's the kind of slack we insist on giving.

1
lemmy.world

They had the same foreign policy every administration since Israel became a country did but some people chose now to get upset about it.

The world is a worse place now because Harris didn't win.

Biden second term would have be heaven compared to this.

15
Grimyreply
lemmy.world

It's almost like if blatant genocide changes the equation. Honestly, Israel should have lost our support a long time ago. It's easy to see how deep corruption and most likely black mail had a big role to play.

Yes, the world would be a better place with Harris at the helm. It's a shame she tried her hardest to lose. FYI, I voted for her but I'm also mature enough to realize that she basically gave all her voters the finger and that's why she lost.

Keep blaming the evil voters who couldn't stomach genocide and we will get the exact same play next election. You are enabling, not helping. It's their job to get votes and care about our opinion ffs.

-3
Grimyreply
lemmy.world

I find it crazier that the dems decided to make genocide a voting issue in the first place. Weaponized incompetence, I swear. They could have told Israel to pound sand, but they chose a foreign state over us. They screwed you too man, have a spine.

-2
Lightorreply
lemmy.world

Yes, but it's not the ONLY thing going on. Would you let the rest of the world burn to stop genocide in the middle east? I'm guessing not.

So if there is a massive problem that we can't directly take action to fix, you try to attack the source of the problem or other adjacent problems.

This idea that the Dems need to be fully against it or I'll never vote for them is naive. If the alternative is WW3 with 10x the deaths or continued genocide I don't like either but I'm not going to sit on the sidelines while WW3 starts and complain about the dems stance as the reason I didn't try to prevent it. Maintaining a moral high ground at the expense of people isn't ok. Yes they could have done a million things better or different, but they didn't. We had a choice to make with the options we had. Some people rejected reality and ushered in this shit storm so they could keep their concussion clean, it's selfish. They'd rather have peace of mind than actually prevent suffering, because they had a chance to and didn't.

There are other people, other children suffering because of Trump that would not have been if Harris won. That's just fact. Preventing him from getting in office or not, the events in the middle east remain the same, but those other lives impacted could have been prevented. We need to open up our world view and have it grounded in reality.

3

So if there is a massive problem that we can't directly take action to fix, you try to attack the source of the problem or other adjacent problems.

I think that is the crux of the issue. I don't see condemning Israel and stopping the sale of weapons as some massive wall. The dems failed to take action and I'm taking action right now by holding them accountable for it.

The fact is they didn't even try to solve the issue. Israel themselves admitted to it. I consider it their fault Trump won and even more people have to suffer. I see the constant scapegoating post-election as serving nothing except enabling them.

They need to be told their platform, built on foreign genocide and apathy, is literally atrocious. We need to demand change, not give them an easy way out.

0

but the democrats have to appeal to their zionist money-givers too! it's difficult for them to strike a balance between the money-givers and the people who are supposed to vote for them.

and the people who should vote for them aren't directly hit personally by the israel genocide, so why would they care too much about that?

1

I spent a bunch of time in such spaces before the election and was shocked how much time and energy was squandered with virtue signaling and purity testing. There was literally no room for anything else in some of them.

23
lemmy.world

And sometimes those people will even destroy active progress because it doesn't meet their definition of perfect.

23
lemmy.wtf

Online leftists will destroy something because it's not 100% of what they want, disregarding the 50-60% that would be what they want.

11
slrpnk.net

I think this "do nothing wrong" tendency has something to do with intragroup power dynamics. I've often seen it used as a cudgel to knock down others within a group and stop mild dissent even though everyone is on the same team. Usually the most prolific wielder of the "do nothing wrong" cudgel rises to a position of some authority in the group, after which the group fragments because the person is insufferable but unassailable due to their moral superiority.

22

Very good take.

I complained to a partner once about something they'd done that seemed vaguely unethical (by my understanding of their ethics). After they apologised, I was still upset, and they said "maybe I'm a little bit shit, just like everyone else."

That really stuck with me. People (including myself) are often OK with accepting imperfections in other people in some spaces, but not in others. It's pretty weird.. Life is messy, even the bits that seems straightforward. And no one has a perfect understanding of any situation..

22

obviously a trap set by bougie liberals to try and get me to vote for a Democrat.

but i'm too smart for them

21

The problem is they keep dissagreeing on details and forget, they'll never agree on everything.

12
Soulgreply
ani.social

Because you're the one in the meme you just don't realize it

4
lemmy.ml

I don't usually participate in communities of my interest, like vegan, communist, anarchist, etc. because I know I don't agree a 100% and that there will always be people that think are better than others or that have a lot more time to spend on activism than me. But all my friends know I never back down when discussing important topics with anyone, I always tell them that I will take the time to discuss with people they don't like, like weird conservatives and other uncomfortable groups (which have a big presence where I study).

I usually can recognize when someone is close to being more left-leaning than what they think they are, and I take the time to talk to them about it, which a lot of leftist communities don't (at least from what I've seen). Yes, there are trolls, but usually when talking in person, they aren't that stupid.

11

Sometimes it feels like people are worse to people that almost agree with them than they are to people who are completely at odds with them.

4
lemmy.world

online leftist

Important things happen offline, online is more or less a distraction.

10

I don't know if that's really true anymore. Or, maybe more accurately, I think we're in between when that was true in the pre-social media age and when it'll be true again after the social web breathes its last. There are just too many ways that megacorps, bad actors, and foreign agents can manipulate offline activity with online action.

Some of those things are manipulating small groups into large-scale action (see: Qanon), but misinformation and meme warfare also have a measurable effect on election, direct action, etc. Not to mention that local organization is best done online, and that has a very real effect.

Now, is offline action more important than online action? Absolutely, and if you're saying that being an "online leftist" (as an identity) is a distraction, I think I agree with you. But online action is more than just a distraction, and to ignore it is probably counterproductive.

12

Yes, but they are inextricably influencing each other. Both are subsets of reality.

2

There's nothing wrong with encouraging others to be better versions of themselves. The problem is many people aren't capable of doing so without being toxic AF.

9

That's not only a problem of online leftists spaces. The left has always been pretty busy with discussing what page of the capital is more beautiful written...

9

Gatekeeping, purity testing, virtue signaling, and no self accountability. These are the four reasons why every leftist space outside of the center left is a complete and utter joke. These traits are cultural in left wing spaces, and they are very common. They are so common that they'll never be going away and they are the root reasons why the left will NEVER accomplish anything substantial during my lifetime.

8
mlg
lemmy.world

Yes let's start a 3rd party

wave of downvotes and idiots screaming about RCV even though that's not a disqualifier

8
lemmy.world

But you’ll continue to support democrats in higher offices until your third party has support in lower offices and a functioning party structure, right?

15
glimsereply
lemmy.world

No!!! The lesser of two evils is still evil so I'd rather vote for a weak 3rd party candidate to help secure the win for the more evil candidate

12
slrpnk.net

If it were only that, but traditionally 3rd party candidates are all the rage 2 weeks before the US elections, and then the day after the elections they're gone from the discourse, and you'll hear nothing about them for the next 4 years.

4

Jill Stein is like a 4-year cicada cycle. She emerges, screams for awhile, then disappears again

2
someguy3reply
lemmy.world

it's that leftists are broadly intellectuals

I used to think this. Then everyone came out about how Kamala didn't get them excited, aka appeal to their emotions. When I pointed this out and that they weren't thinking logically and instead relying on emotions they frankly agreed, saying something something not a robot. And there were proud of it.

8
naught101reply
lemmy.world

Is being an intellectual mutually exclusive with having emotions? Because as far as I know all people have emotions..

6
someguy3reply
lemmy.world

If you let your emotions dictate your thoughts and actions, I have bad news for you.

3
naught101reply
lemmy.world

Bro, you do it too, you just don't admit it to yourself.

3

I don't do it to a point of being a complicit in electing Hitler 2.0. Which shouldn't be abhigh bar. But here we are!

2
naught101reply
lemmy.world

🤷

Modern psychology and neuroscience agrees with me. Eg. https://neurosciencenews.com/emotion-reason-decision-making-25803/

Or have a read of Kahneman's Thinking Fast and Thinking Slow if you want something a bit deeper.

The human brain is packed full of inescapable cognitive biases, many of which relate to emotions. They occur just as much for you as for me, and ignoring them or denying them just makes the problem worse.

2

emotions, as demonstrated in his wine tasting study

Lololololololol. Whatever you're trying to say it's based on wine tasting. Lolololololol.

My last message to you is: go ahead and cry during old yeller. When it comes to politics, think.

2
ipitcoreply
lemmy.super.ynh.fr

it’s that leftists are broadly intellectuals or at least identify as intellectual because of effort they put into honoring nuance

Nah. It's just that they believe they are better and have huge confirmation bias. You're not with them? You're an enemy and should be banned because you're a troll.

Can't we just fucking have a place where everyone is free to speak? Circlejerks are cringe

4
XM34reply
feddit.org

It's funny how you just mentioned my entire list of blocked instances 😂

Case in point I guess.

1
ipitcoreply
lemmy.super.ynh.fr

Do you believe feddit.org is better in that regard? Did you experience edge cases and stuff?

2
XM34reply
feddit.org

No, feddit.org has its fair share of weirdos. But it's fast and ich_iel is by far the best Community in all of Lemmy

2

I have referenced this post so many times but was never able to find it so thanks

7
lemmy.super.ynh.fr

I believe it's actually the opposite. So many extremists or "I don’t agree with you therefore you’re a troll" bullshit.

You get censored and banned for pretty much anything. Lemmy is no exception and pretty obviously like that.

6
lemmy.ca

You get censored and banned for pretty much anything. Lemmy is no exception and pretty obviously like that.

Seeing as I have not been banned for anything I have to disagree.

13
Naraukoreply
lemmy.world

It depends on the instance and mods I think. I got a temp ban from an instance just citing "bad faith" for asking if there was a source article and getting flamed for "standing in the way of the movement". I accept that the Libre/FOSS space trends towards more niche user bases, and Lemmy is infinitely better than any other alternatives, but sometimes it feels a bit to close to Emo Phillips "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912".

2
lemmy.ca

It depends on the instance and mods I think

Of course it does. Anyone can start their own instance, if there is an issue it is a problem with that instance, not Lemmy as a whole.

The Internet is not obsessed with speed running just because there exists websites on it obsessed with speed running.

2

Very true, and everyone should keep that in mind. It's also true that there is an outsized visibility and impact that instances like ML and hexbear have on the zeitgeist/perception of the platform. It doesn't help that the creators are ML.

The Internet is not obsessed with speed running just because there exists websites on it obsessed with speed running.

The Internet also sends greeting cards and is used for business/stock market trading, but everyone knows that the Internet is FOR porn.

2

It really depends on the community and the mods awake at the time.

One of my accounts got a week ban from a larger community for being "accusatory". Because I said someone sounded like they were spreading misinformation.

2
ipitcoreply
lemmy.super.ynh.fr

Depends on the things you say, where…

If you’re generally leftist, you should mostly be fine.

Otherwise you get banned for trolling (because ofc they’re right so you’re trolling) or transphobia, because if you don’t agree with everything a trans person says, you’re transphobic. Also, the world belongs to them.

Talk about lesser known subjects by the public or make a mistake yourself? Thats it, you’re banned for misinformation and trolling. Or being a nazi or racist or whatever. The words don’t have a meaning anymore

Also the random ban reasons like "Rule 3" which refers to the most open and subjective rules like "Be civil" or "Dont be a dick" or similar

-2
lemmy.world

Yeah, and you made a pretty blanket statement about all trans people, or ig all trans people on Lemmy, based on your experience with like, a handful of people?

2
ipitcoreply
lemmy.super.ynh.fr

If you want an example, I said trans athletes being in man or women categories is a debate and shouldn’t be allowed by default because of inequalities between the individuals, and true equality can never be reached.

I believe the use of "biological men" trigged them when I said that transgender women were that… when I was talking about scientific stuff to make my point.

Super transphobic, watch out! ☢️ -_-

0

man or women categories is a debate and shouldn’t be allowed by default because of inequalities between the individuals, and true equality can never be reached.

Studies have found the only Olympic events in which trans women might have an advantage over cis women is mid range sprints. There has been no advantage shown in the short or long sprint events nor any other categories.

If you want to talk about equality in sports the biggest inequality that affects outcomes is money. Athletes with more money poured into them for training and equipment have a significant advantage over other athletes.

2

Why would I care about what you said to invite derision? The problem, currently, is your attempted usage of derision to discredit an entire group of marginalized people based on your EXTREMELY LIMITED and STATISTICALLY IRRELEVANT experiences.

Boohoo the trans people in the trans community disagreed with me about trans issues and the trans people called me transphobic because I have controversial opinions that I chose to share.

Get over it. Honestly, get over yourself. Grow up.

0
lemmy.today

All I did was misgender Kris by calling them a "xir".

They were arguing over gender, and I was feeling like being contrarian...

3
lemmy.ca

Depends on the things you say

So not "pretty much anything" then.

2
ipitcoreply
lemmy.super.ynh.fr

I thought it was obvious that it was an exaggeration. If you go out of the normal way, according to the mods, well you’re fucked

0
lemmy.ca

Well we're disagreeing right now, so logically only one of us can be "the normal way" yet neither of us are banned...

1
ipitcoreply
lemmy.super.ynh.fr

I financially frauded once. I’ve never been penalized for it. That must mean the government is fine with it.

I insulted someone in a game and never got penalized for it, so it must mean the moderators in that game are okay with it.

It’s the same kind of logic, no?

That’s the kind of things that happens. Else I guess I hallucinated a couple times in a row, or I mod removed my posts and banned my account by myself. Must be what happened.

Either everything is moderated and censored, or nothing. No in between can exist.

Seriously, come on, that’s not how it works and you know it as much as me.

And fortunately there are still mods that let you speak, people that don’t report you… but what I describe will end up happening if you have these kind of behaviors or point of view.

-1

Either everything is moderated and censored, or nothing. No in between can exist.

That is the argument you were presenting, yes. I'm glad we agree that that is absurd.

but what I describe will end up happening

Nevermind, here you are making the statement you just argued against.

0

Oh and also the double standards

You can hope for Musk and Trump or any rich fuck to die, but do this with someone else and you’re banned

-1
Psythikreply
lemm.ee

I've said some vile, fucked up shit while I'm having a bipolar depressive episode, but I have yet to get modded for a single thing.

You can basically say whatever the fuck you want, like 4chan. But unlike 4chan, Lemmy hasn't yet devolved into a cesspool of hate and bigotry. Probably only 'cause the average troll is too stupid to figure out how federation works.

6

Weird then. From experience this tends to dissapear quickly. Maybe it wasn't so bad or no one saw and reported it

-1
XM34reply
feddit.org

I would even go as far as to argue Lemmy is a prime example of this.

3

And that why federation is good, but it gets annoying having to switch instances or communities

3

I don’t know, I’m not on reddit. And by definition if it’s removed I can’t see it.

3

This is what I've been saying. The gatekeeping is unreal. How the fuck are we supposed to grow as a movement if we can't accept those who maybe did and/or said some questionable shit in the past? If someone is trying to make positive changes and is demonstrating it with their actions and/or words than we should accept them. I guarantee the vast majority of you here have said or did something that goes against your current beliefs.

6

An alarming number of leftists are not revolutionaries but dictators without power.

6

Not to ironically quibble, the sentiment is there, but I think "more important to do nothing correctly than something incorrectly" is closer to the mark

5
lemmy.myserv.one

Every time I see the idiots calling for abolishment of the police, I never see anything remotely approaching a viable replacement for what they should be doing.

We're not solving murder, rape, burglaries, drunk driving, general assaults, etc overnight. And we're certainly not within a five year plan of solving those things either.

So yeah, hardline abolishment fanatics can shove off. Come back with actual solutions, even if they arent perfect, thanks.

5
SethWreply
lemmy.world

To be fair cops arent solving those problems either. also theres plenty of essays around the nuances of this subject for you to explore and analyze if you look it up.. not that we're all depending on you and your validation anyway

2
lemmy.ca

These aren't solvable problems, they will always exist. But while they can't be solved they can be mitigated. Saying murders happen therefore the concept of having police is wrong is ignoring the fact that there can be more or less murders. Less murders is good even if not perfect.

1

fyi cops are not out there stopping murders, they write the report after and if you're very special you'll get a detective that looks into it but that murder was not mitigated from happening by the existence of police

1

The left purity spirals and eats their own. There is also an unhealthy obsession with victimhood. If these two things were solved the left would be more successful. It would also cease to be "the left" in any modern sense of the word.

4
Tuxmanreply
sh.itjust.works

The ONLY time I’ve been muted by anyone was on the Fediverse 😅 (Still can’t wrap my head around how petty the argument was…)

3

And it's even worse when that person is an instance admin or community mod of a pretty big place

2

Yeah, good point. I agree that calling-in is better than calling-out, when it seems viable. There's always the trade-off with how much energy you have available though.

3

Leftist thought is predicted on dialectical materialism. That means that when someone presents you with material facts which conflict with your ideology, you plug your ears and call them a liberal.

3
lemmy.world

Can we stop attacking each other? They are working the "divide and conquer" from every angle, can we not create yet another division within a group of people that agree with each other?

2
Crikestereply
lemm.ee

Democrats and liberals are doing the dividing themselves every time they attack people further left of them for daring to actually have principles.

So no, you can’t stop.

2

And this wild characterization of everyone in a group helps nothing. People seem so hungry for more enemies.

1
lemmy.dbzer0.com

can we stop attacking each other?

I challenge you to a duel.

can we not create division?

Oh so you think we should work with just anyone?

agree with each other

How dare you suggest i agree with those people! You understand nithing

1
bstixreply
feddit.dk

The point of that chapter is that you should use the talent that God has given you to improve your talent.

It's not that you should pay back your employer double his investment.

2

Alternate take: Billionaires are entitled and get grumpy when they get back exactly what they gave.

Imagine if the servant had invested the talent and failed to produce a profit. How angry would the billionaire have been? The servant took no risk, and protected the billionaire’s money. And instead of being happy that their money was protected, they got angry that the servant didn’t go out of their way to make the billionaire more.

5
lemmy.world

Okay this is really good but I don't see how it links with this thread, kindly explain sir

1
lemmy.world

But doing nothing wrong is the greatest right you can do, no?

-7
PoPoPreply
lemm.ee

Doing nothing wrong is doing nothing, period.

14
lemmy.world

How? You banned most of the guns, and most of you are anti gun to begin with. Shit, I’d be banned on Reddit just for typing that out. I’m not advocating violence, I just don’t see any other way to actually affect change at this point.

Do you think we’ll actually get fair elections going forward? The last one might not have been, there’s a lawsuit and everything. I sure don’t think we will.

I agree with the sentiment of the post but I don’t see WTF else we can collectively do about it.

I will admit that the No Kings protests across the nation gave me a little hope, at least.

-10

"Banned most of the guns" 😂

Jesus mate, ever wonder why you get banned for saying something as demonstrably false as this?

5

I fucking wish we banned any of the guns, why do you people just blatantly make shit up as if nobody would notice?

1